Indian Perspectives on Workplace Bullying

Premilla D’Cruz · Ernesto Noronha  Avina Mendonca · Nidhi Mishra Editors

Indian Perspectives on Workplace Bullying A Decade of Insights

Indian Perspectives on Workplace Bullying

Premilla D’Cruz  •  Ernesto Noronha Avina Mendonca  •  Nidhi Mishra Editors

Indian Perspectives on Workplace Bullying A Decade of Insights

Editors Premilla D’Cruz Organizational Behaviour Area Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India

Ernesto Noronha Organizational Behaviour Area Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India

Avina Mendonca Organizational Behaviour Area Indian Institute of Management Nagpur Nagpur, Maharashtra, India

Nidhi Mishra Organizational Behaviour Area Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India

ISBN 978-981-13-1016-4    ISBN 978-981-13-1017-1 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1017-1 Library of Congress Control Number: 2018957834 © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721, Singapore

To my father, Lambert, for his integrity, magnanimity and fortitude. Few can match his grace and courage. Premilla D’Cruz

Acknowledgements

This book emerged from a one day workshop titled ‘Indian Perspectives on Workplace Bullying and Mobbing’ organized by us at IIM Ahmedabad. We are grateful to the Research and Publications Unit of IIM Ahmedabad for funding the workshop and to all participants who attended the workshop. Much appreciation to our contributors for being a part of this volume. We commend the assistance of Ankur Sumesra, secretary to the first two editors, in organizing the workshop and in facilitating the compilation of this volume. The interest of Springer, particularly Shinjini Chatterjee and Priya Vyas, in the publication process deserves a special mention. Credit for production is due to Sudantradevi Lakshmikanthan and Raagai Priya Chandrasekaran of SPi Global. Premilla warmly acknowledges the unstinting support of Charlotte Rayner and Roelie Mulder while Avina thanks her family and friends for their love and encouragement.

vii

Contents

1 ‘Varieties of Workplace Bullying’ in India: Towards a Contextualized Understanding��������������������������������������������    1 Premilla D’Cruz, Ernesto Noronha, and Ananya Syal 2 Workplace Bullying and Physical Ill-Health: Role of Negative Emotions and Perceived Organizational Support��������������������������������   33 Mariam Ciby and R. P. Raya 3 Forgiveness: A New Dynamic in Workplace Bullying��������������������������   59 Nidhi Mishra, Premilla D’Cruz, Parvinder Gupta, and Ernesto Noronha 4 Linking Workplace Bullying and Work Outcomes: Mediating Role of Psychological Contract Violation and Moderating Role of Psychosocial Safety Climate��������������������������   79 Arpana Rai and Upasna A. Agarwal 5 Workplace Bullying and Organizational Well-Being: A Moderated Mediation Model of Psychological Capital and Burnout in Human Services Sector of India��������������������  111 Richa Gupta and Arti Bakhshi 6 Indian Freelancers’ Experiences of Bullying on Online Labour Markets: Insights into Digital Workplaces in the Informal Economy������������������������������������������������������������������������  147 Ernesto Noronha and Premilla D’Cruz 7 Abuse Faced by Child Labourers: Novel Territory in Workplace Bullying ����������������������������������������������������������������������������  173 Muneeb Ul Lateef Banday, Saikat Chakraborty, Premilla D’Cruz, and Ernesto Noronha

ix

x

Contents

8 Beauty Service Workers’ Encounters with Abusive Customers: Furthering the Concept of External Bullying at Work������������������������  205 Avina Mendonca, Premilla D’Cruz, and Ernesto Noronha 9 Workplace Bullying in India: The Current Policy Context, Implications and Future Directions��������������������������������������������������������  237 Aditya Jain

About the Editors

Premilla D’Cruz holds a PhD in Social Sciences from the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai, India. She is currently Professor of Organizational Behaviour at the Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, India. Together with Ernesto Noronha, Premilla has been researching the area of workplace bullying for over a decade and has covered various facets of the phenomenon through pioneering work which has extended the boundaries of our understanding. In addition to two books on workplace bullying, Premilla has published numerous papers in reputed peerreviewed journals and made several international presentations on the topic. Premilla, along with Ernesto Noronha, is Chief Editor of Handbooks of Workplace Bullying, Emotional Abuse and Harassment, Volumes 1-4 (Springer). Premilla’s other research interests include emotions at work, self and identity, organizational control, and information and communication technologies (ICTs) and organizations. Premilla has been a visiting scholar at various European and Australian universities and has received multilateral and bilateral study grants and research awards. She has served as the President (2016–2018), Secretary (2010–2016) and Special Interest Groups Co-ordinator (2008–2010) of the International Association on Workplace Bullying and Harassment (IAWBH). Ernesto Noronha holds a PhD in Social Sciences from the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai, India. He is currently Professor of Organizational Behaviour at the Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, India. Together with Premilla D’Cruz, Ernesto has been involved in pioneering studies on various aspects of workplace bullying and has several published papers and presentations in the substantive area. Ernesto, along with Premilla D’Cruz, is Chief Editor of Handbooks of Workplace Bullying, Emotional Abuse and Harassment, Volumes 1-4 (Springer). Ernesto’s other research interests include workplace ethnicity, technology and work, and labour and globalization, and he has numerous papers published in reputed peer-reviewed journals on these topics. He has been awarded bilateral and multilateral grants to study various aspects of employee experiences of work in India’s offshoring and outsourcing sector, focusing on new and unexplored areas such as

xi

xii

About the Editors

organizational control, diversity, telework and collectivization. Ernesto has been a visiting professor at the Industrial and Labour Relations (ILR) School, Cornell University, and at the Institute for Sociology, University of Vienna. He has presented invited talks as a visiting scholar at numerous European universities such as Strathclyde, Portsmouth, Bergen and Hamburg, in addition to the keynote address at the 2010 Work, Employment and Society (WES) conference. Avina Mendonca is Assistant Professor of Organizational Behaviour at the Indian Institute of Management Nagpur, India. A Fellow in Organizational Behaviour from the Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, India, her doctoral dissertation explored employees’ lived experiences of beauty service work as dirty work. Before pursuing her doctoral studies, Avina worked as a lecturer of Organizational Behaviour at Vivekananda College of Engineering and Technology, Puttur, India. Avina’s research interests include customer abuse, dirty work, identity, resistance, service work and workplace bullying. She has co-authored a chapter on flow among academicians in the collection New Ways of Studying Emotions in Organizations (2015, Emerald). Her article on bad apple behaviour in groups and teams (2017, co-authored with Saravana Jaikumar) has appeared in Team Performance Management: An International Journal. Nidhi  Mishra is a doctoral scholar in Organizational Behaviour at the Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, India. Her current research, anchored in postpositivism and located in India’s IT/ITES-BPO sector, aims at understanding targets’ subjective experiences of the forgiveness response to workplace bullying. Her research interests include workplace forgiveness, workplace bullying, coping, emotions and power. Nidhi has co-authored a book chapter titled Understanding Flow among Academicians published in 2015 by Emerald, in addition to providing teaching assistance for the course Socio-Political Contexts for Research in Management at the Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad. She has presented papers at national and international conferences. Prior to pursuing her doctoral studies, Nidhi worked as a software engineer for 3 years at Accenture Services Private Limited, Mumbai, India.

Contributors

Upasna A. Agarwal  Department of Human Resource and Organizational Behaviour, National Institute of Industrial Engineering, Mumbai, India Arti Bakhshi  P.G. Department of Psychology, University of Jammu, Jammu, India Muneeb Ul Lateef Banday  Organizational Behaviour Area, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad, India Saikat Chakraborty  Organizational Behaviour Area, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad, India Mariam Ciby  Department of Management, Saintgits Institute of Management, Kottayam, India Premilla D’Cruz  Organizational Behaviour Area, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad, India Parvinder Gupta  Organizational Behaviour Area, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad, India Richa Gupta  Department of Higher Education, Government of Jammu and Kashmir, Jammu, India Aditya Jain  Division of Organizational Behaviour/Human Resource Management, Nottingham University Business School, Nottingham, UK Avina Mendonca  Organizational Behaviour Area, Indian Institute of Management Nagpur, Nagpur, India Nidhi Mishra  Organizational Behaviour Area, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad, India

xiii

xiv

Contributors

Ernesto Noronha  Organizational Behaviour Area, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad, India Arpana Rai  Department of Human Resource and Organizational Behaviour, National Institute of Industrial Engineering, Mumbai, India R. P. Raya  Department of Management Studies, Pondicherry University, Puducherry, India Ananya Syal  Organizational Behaviour Area, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad, India

Abbreviations

AGFI AMOS AMT ASSOCHAM AVE BCa CI BPM BPO CFA CFI CI CL CLF CLPR CMV COR CR CSR df DRMU DV EU EU-OSHA GDP GFI HR HRM HSE IBM ICTs ICTDs

Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index Analysis of Moment Structures Amazon Mechanical Turk Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India Average Variance Extracted Bias Corrected and Accelerated Confidence Interval Business Process Management Business Process Outsourcing Confirmatory Factor Analysis Comparative Fit Index Confidence Interval Confidence Limit Common Latent Factor Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Common Method Variance Conservation of Resources Composite Reliability Corporate Social Responsibility Degrees of Freedom Dakshini Rajasthan Mazdoor Union Dependent Variable European Union European Agency for Safety and Health at Work Gross Domestic Product Goodness of Fit Index Human Resource/Resources Human Resource/Resources Management Health and Safety Executive International Business Machines Information and Communication Technologies Information and Communication Technologies and Devices xv

xvi

ILER ILO ILPI IT ITES ITQ IWB JDC-S JD-R LL MBI-HSS MNC NASSCOM NAQ NAQ-R NCPCR n.d. NE NFI NGO NREGA NSDC OBC OCB OHS OLM OWB PANAS PC PCLRA PCV PCQ PIH PLS POB POCSO POS PSC PsyCap RMR RMSEA Rs. RTE SC SD

Abbreviations

India Labour and Employment Report International Labour Organization International Law and Policy Institute Information Technology Information Technology-Enabled Services Intention To Quit Innovative Work Behaviour Job Demands-Control-Support Job Demands-Resources Lower Limit Maslach Burnout Inventory-Human Services Survey Multi-National Corporation National Association of Software and Services Companies Negative Acts Questionnaire Negative Acts Questionnaire-Revised National Commission for Protection of Child Rights Not dated Negative Emotions Normed Fit Index Non-Governmental Organization National Rural Employment Guarantee Act National Skill Development Corporation Other Backward Class Organizational Citizenship Behaviour Occupational Health and Safety Online Labour Markets Organizational Well-Being Positive and Negative Affect Schedule Psychological Contract Prayas Centre for Labour Research and Action Psychological Contract Violation PsyCap Questionnaire Physical Ill-Health Partial Least Squares Positive Organizational Behaviour Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Perceived Organizational Support Psychosocial Safety Climate Psychological Capital Root Mean Square Residual Root Mean Square Error of Approximation Indian Rupees Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Scheduled Caste Standard Deviation

Abbreviations

SE SEM SET SPSS SRMR ST TLI UK UL UN UN CEDAW

xvii

Standard Error Structural Equation Modelling Social Exchange Theory Statistical Package for the Social Sciences Standardized Root Mean Square Residual Scheduled Tribe Tucker-Lewis Index United Kingdom Upper Limit United Nations United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women UN CERD United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination UN CESCR United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund US$ US/American Dollar USA/US United States of America VIF Variance Inflation Factor WHO World Health Organization WHO SEARO World Health Organization, South-East Asia Regional Office WHS Work Harassment Scale WPB Workplace Bullying

List of Figures

Fig. 2.1 Structural models. (a) Model 1, total effect model. (b) Model 2, mediation model. (c) Model 3, simple mediation model plus POS. (d) Model 4, interaction effect model��������������������������������������������������� 46 Fig. 4.1 Hypothesized model������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 82 Fig. 4.2 Alternate models. (a) Model with direct effect. (b) Model with mediated effects����������������������������������������������������������� 95 Fig. 4.3 The interactive effects of workplace bullying and PSC on PCV����������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 96 Fig. 5.1 Theoretical framework demonstrating the moderating effect of PsyCap on the indirect negative association between workplace bullying and organizational well-being mediated through burnout����������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 122 Fig. 5.2 Moderating effect of PsyCap on the positive relationship between workplace bullying and burnout������������������������������������������� 129 Fig. 5.3 Moderating effect of PsyCap on the negative relationship between burnout and organizational well-being��������������������������������� 129

xix

List of Tables

Table 1.1 Features of interpersonal and depersonalized bullying at work��������    6 Table 1.2 Features of internal/intra-organizational and external/ extra-organizational interpersonal bullying at work�������������������������    7 Table 1.3 The presence of ‘varieties of workplace bullying’ in India��������������    9 Table 1.4 The chapters of this volume vis-à-vis ‘varieties of workplace bullying’������������������������������������������������������   26 Table 2.1 Table 2.2 Table 2.3 Table 2.4 Table 2.5

Descriptive statistics of constructs����������������������������������������������������   43 Construct reliability and outer loadings��������������������������������������������   44 Discriminant validity and convergent validity����������������������������������   44 Structural model results��������������������������������������������������������������������   45 Mediation effects of simple mediation model of WPB and PIH���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   48

Table 4.1 Profile of the organizations and prevalence of workplace bullying���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   88 Table 4.2 Results of confirmatory factor analysis of the measurement models�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   92 Table 4.3 Descriptive statistics and inter-construct correlations�����������������������   94 Table 4.4 Mediating role of PCV in workplace bullying and outcomes relationships��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   95 Table 4.5 Moderating effects of PSC on workplace bullying-PCV relationship����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   96 Table 5.1 Mean, standard deviation (SD) and intercorrelations among variables under study������������������������������������������������������������������������  127 Table 5.2 Reliability and validity indices���������������������������������������������������������  127 Table 5.3 Moderation effects of PsyCap�����������������������������������������������������������  128 Table 5.4 Conditional indirect effects at different levels of moderator PsyCap����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  130

xxi

xxii

List of Tables

Table 6.1 Target experiences of bullying in conventional workplaces�������������  149 Table 6.2 Target experiences of bullying in conventional workplaces versus online labour markets������������������������������������������������������������  163 Table 7.1 Foci and respondents in the trend survey������������������������������������������  181 Table 7.2 Foci and participants in the qualitative interviews����������������������������  182 Table 8.1 Sociodemographic details of the participants�����������������������������������  213 Table 9.1 Potential negative and positive psychosocial work environment dimensions����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������  239 Table 9.2 Levels of intervention�����������������������������������������������������������������������  242 Table 9.3 Interview participants������������������������������������������������������������������������  247 Table 9.4 Thematic framework�������������������������������������������������������������������������  252

Chapter 1

‘Varieties of Workplace Bullying’ in India: Towards a Contextualized Understanding Premilla D’Cruz, Ernesto Noronha, and Ananya Syal

Abstract  The study of workplace bullying (WPB) in India dates back over a decade, rendering it an established area of inquiry. This chapter, using the lens of D’Cruz and Noronha’s (Res Emot Organ 12:409–444, 2016) varieties of workplace bullying, elaborates on the sociocultural underpinnings of the phenomenon in the subcontinent, drawing on the extant literature. While the incidence rate of workplace bullying in India at over 40% across numerous inquiries is higher than many other countries, factors such as power, social categories, individualism and materialism are seen as triggers while factors such as spiritualism and social support are seen as antidotes. In showing how available empirical evidence from India demonstrates the role of the country’s ethos in the dynamics of workplace bullying, the chapter reinforces D’Cruz’s (Workplace bullying in India. Routledge, New Delhi, 2012; India: a paradoxical context for workplace bullying. In: Omari M, Paull M (eds) Workplace abuse, incivility and bullying: methodological and cultural perspectives. Routledge, London, pp 55–70, 2016a) thesis that India serves as a paradoxical context for the phenomenon. The chapter urges the incorporation of a sociocultural lens in studies of workplace bullying in India, maintaining that such an approach is critical to facilitate relevant and effective interventions to tackle the problem in the subcontinent. To this end, it proposes the adoption of metaphorical or a combination of dimensional and metaphorical frameworks in inquiries of workplace bullying in the country. Keywords  Varieties of workplace bullying · Interpersonal bullying · Depersonalized bullying · Cyberbullying · External bullying · Compounded bullying · Dual locus bullying · India · Power · Spiritualism · Materialism · Social category · Social support

P. D’Cruz (*) · E. Noronha · A. Syal Organizational Behaviour Area, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad, India © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018 P. D’Cruz et al. (eds.), Indian Perspectives on Workplace Bullying, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1017-1_1

1

2

P. D’Cruz et al.

1.1  Introduction Workplace bullying encompasses subtle and/or obvious negative behaviours embodying aggression, hostility, intimidation and harm, generally characterized by persistence, displayed by an individual and/or group to another individual and/or group at work, privately and/or publicly, in real and/or virtual forms, in the context of an existing or evolving unequal power relationship (D’Cruz 2015a, p. 7). Alternatively known as workplace mobbing or workplace harassment, workplace bullying signifies emotional abuse and is a unique construct in its own right, distinctive from poor or substandard physical working conditions, exploitation, organizational controls and the labour process (D’Cruz and Noronha 2009, 2015a; D’Cruz et al. 2018). Undoubtedly, workplace bullying may coexist along with these entities, sharing some aetiological features, linkages with issues of power(lessness) (D’Cruz 2015a) as well as the accord of indignity on employees (Noronha et al. 2018), but even so, it remains differentiated by its essential attribute of being misbehaviour of an affective nature (D’Cruz et al. 2018). Interestingly, workplace bullying is seen as conceptually distinct from category-based harassment linked to social identities such as race, class, gender, caste, region, disability, sexuality and so on (D’Cruz 2012). Yet, where both forms of misbehaviour are enacted jointly, they are often experienced as indistinguishable, particularly where social identities trigger emotional abuse, and hence difficult to analyse separately (D’Cruz and Noronha 2013a). Indeed, the narratives of targets of such negative acts often evidence the fusion of both bullying and category-based harassment.1 The study of workplace bullying in India (see D’Cruz 2012, 2016a for comprehensive accounts) dates back over a decade beginning with the work of D’Cruz, Noronha and Rayner who conducted the earliest studies on the topic (D’Cruz 2007, 2010; D’Cruz and Noronha 2008a, b, 2009, 2010a, b; D’Cruz and Rayner 2009). Since then, as well as seminal contributions to the substantive area, there have been considerable pathbreaking, rich and contextualized insights into various aspects of the phenomenon in the subcontinent, as this chapter goes on to detail (see also D’Cruz 2012, 2015a, b, 2016a; D’Cruz and Noronha 2013a, 2014a, 2018a, b; D’Cruz and Rayner 2013), rendering it into an established, rather than nascent (Gupta et al. 2017; Rai and Agarwal 2017a), theme of inquiry. The incidence rate of workplace bullying in India, reported at over 40% across various studies (Ciby and Raya, Chap. 2 this volume; D’Cruz 2007; D’Cruz and Rayner 2009, 2013; Gupta et al. 2017; Rai and Agarwal 2017a), is much higher than global figures which vary between 11% and 18% (Nielsen et al. 2010). Moreover, the conflation of workplace bullying in the subcontinent with category-based harassment linked to gender, caste, region, religion, disability and so on has also been found (D’Cruz 2015b, 2016a, b; D’Cruz and Noronha 2013a; D’Cruz et  al. 2014; D’Cruz et  al. 2016). While 1  See Handbooks of Workplace Bullying, Emotional Abuse and Harassment, Volumes 1–4 (Chief Editors: Premilla D’Cruz and Ernesto Noronha, Springer Singapore) for international state of the art of the substantive area.

1  ‘Varieties of Workplace Bullying’ in India: Towards a Contextualized Understanding

3

a­ ddressing the issue of workplace bullying in India is obviously imperative, D’Cruz (2012, 2016a) and D’Cruz and Rayner (2013) emphasize that a sociocultural lens is indispensable to this endeavour, maintaining that inquiries which undergird intervention efforts should be informed by this frame. The urgency of this agenda need not be overemphasized as workplace bullying falls under the rubric of negative, dysfunctional and counterproductive workplace behaviours (Fox and Spector 2005) and is a more crippling and devastating problem for employees than all other work-related stress put together, constituting an extreme type of social stressor at work (Zapf et al. 1996). Physical, emotional and behavioural strain, often associated with trauma and even suicidal tendencies (Hogh et  al. 2011a), with adverse personal and professional implications (Samnani and Singh 2012), are commonly reported. Indeed, the phenomenon has two features that are simultaneously ubiquitous yet salient. Firstly, workplace bullying is described as unethical behaviour. Going against universal social rules of acceptability (Ramsay et al. 2011), it violates basic normative principles of utilitarianism, moral rights, distributive justice, care and virtue (LaVan and Martin 2008). Secondly, workplace bullying is complicated by its context. Since daily attendance at work is generally mandatory, linked to the fulfilment of basic adult obligations of providing for oneself and one’s family, workplace negativity cannot be avoided (Lutgen-Sandvik 2005).

1.2  ‘ Varieties of Workplace Bullying’: The Conceptual Spectrum of the Phenomenon D’Cruz and Noronha (2016, p. 409) have coined the term varieties of workplace bullying to describe the several types of emotional abuse at work known to date. Enacted in a relational context, workplace bullying is manifested behaviourally through negative acts that signify emotional abuse (D’Cruz et  al. 2018). These include person-related and task-related behaviours, neatly summarized by Einarsen and Hoel (2001). The former comprise making insulting remarks, excessive teasing, spreading gossip or rumours, persistent criticism, intimidation and threats, whereas the latter encompass giving unreasonable deadlines or unmanageable workloads, excessive monitoring of work or assigning meaningless tasks or even no tasks. Yet, undergirding these displays is a phenomenon which embodies a multifaceted nature. The ‘varieties of workplace bullying’ referred to by D’Cruz and Noronha (2016) encompass the twin lines of level of analysis and location of the source of misbehaviour (D’Cruz 2015a, p.  72; D’Cruz and Noronha 2016, p.  413). Accordingly, bullying could be interpersonal and/or depersonalized in terms of level (pp. 412– 413) and internal and/or external to the workplace in terms of location (p.  414) (D’Cruz and Noronha 2016). In addition, each of these varieties of workplace bullying could be either in-situ/face-to-face/real and/or cyber/online/electronic in form, described as traditional and/or virtual bullying respectively (D’Cruz 2015a, b, p. 8;

4

P. D’Cruz et al.

D’Cruz and Noronha 2013a). Workplace bullying is essentially a psychological phenomenon, but as the following paragraphs and sections show, an interdisciplinary base is integral to its exploration and unravelling. Even at the narrowest conceptualization, given its antecedents in work contexts, its linkage with power and so on, the phenomenon can be truly understood only by drawing on sociology, anthropology, communication, economics, political studies, law and other social sciences. In broadening the micro-level psychology-based lens that is commonly used, an interdisciplinary view greatly enriches the substantive area with insights that would otherwise remain untapped. Such an approach which allows for holistic and contextualized theoretical frameworks and commensurate research designs is critical to effective intervention as it provides a more comprehensive and realistic and hence more valid basis for action (see also D’Cruz et al. 2018). At the interpersonal level of analysis,2 workplace bullying has been defined as ‘…harassing, offending, socially excluding someone or negatively affecting someone’s work tasks…repeatedly and regularly (e.g. weekly) and over a period of time (e.g. about 6  months) such that an escalating process ensues, in the course of which the person confronted ends up in an inferior position and becomes the target of systematic negative social acts’ (Einarsen et al. 2011, p. 22). Interpersonal bullying is characterized by a target orientation where a superior, peer and/or subordinate singles out and persistently harasses a colleague, victimizing the latter to the point of powerlessness and defencelessness (D’Cruz 2012; Einarsen et  al. 2011). Under such circumstances, bullying is personalized and emphasizes a socio relational conceptualization (Keashly and Harvey 2006), moving in a downwards (superior to subordinate), horizontal (peer to peer) or upwards (subordinate to superior) direction (Branch et al. 2013; D’Cruz 2015a) or as cross-level co-bullying where peers and/or subordinates join superiors as perpetrators (D’Cruz and Rayner 2013, p. 607). The frequency and duration of bullying in terms of being habitual and patterned (Einarsen et al. 2011) give it a corrosive character (LutgenSandvik 2005), though it is increasingly being recognized that even a single severe encounter can be experienced as a critical life event that unleashes grievous harm (D’Cruz 2015a). Notwithstanding its level of analysis, Lutgen-Sandvik and Scheller Arsht (2014) maintain that interpersonal bullying is a systemic issue whose negative outward effects precipitate a toxic workplace climate that wears out workforce capital. Left unaddressed or ineffectively tackled, interpersonal bullying often gets embedded and entrenched in the organizational culture (LutgenSandvik and Scheller Arsht 2014). D’Cruz (2015a) and D’Cruz and Noronha (2009) have developed the concept of depersonalized bullying to capture the organizational level of analysis.3 Depersonalized bullying refers to the routine subjugation of employees by contextual, structural and processual elements of organizational design, which are implemented by supervisors and managers who involuntarily resort to abusive and hostile behaviours in an impersonal way to achieve organizational effectiveness  See D’Cruz (2015a) for the essential features of interpersonal bullying at work.  See D’Cruz (2015a) for the essential features of depersonalized bullying at work.

2 3

1  ‘Varieties of Workplace Bullying’ in India: Towards a Contextualized Understanding

5

(D’Cruz 2015a, p. 2; D’Cruz and Noronha 2009, p. 42). The organizational agenda, determined by extra-organizational dynamics and intra-organizational aspirations, lays the foundation for the internal organizational environment, influencing managerial ideology and organizational culture via organizational policies, practices, structure, technology, controls and leadership. Together, these components of organizational design suppress employees, ensuring their deference to organizational expectations. Supervisors and managers whose responsibilities lie in ensuring organizational competitiveness implement organizational requirements across the workforce, resorting to intimidation and aggression without targeting any particular employee or harbouring any intention other than the realization of organizational imperatives (D’Cruz 2015a; D’Cruz and Noronha 2009). Depersonalized bullying, also termed as organizational/institutionalized bullying (Einarsen et  al. 2011; Liefooghe and Mackenzie-Davey 2001) and invoking a sociostructural ‘organization-as-bully’ conceptualization (Keashly and Harvey 2006), is downwards in direction, with the presence of abusive and hostile behaviours distinguishing it from the labour process, techno bureaucratic and socio ideological organizational controls and exploitation (D’Cruz 2015a; D’Cruz and Noronha 2009). Table 1.1 showcases the features of interpersonal and depersonalized bullying at work, through a comparison of similarities and differences. While levels of analysis have begun to receive increasing attention in the scholarly pursuit of workplace bullying, research on the location of the source of misbehaviour is catching up. Our insights into workplace bullying are largely confined to internal/intra-organizational sources (D’Cruz 2015a). External/extra-organizational bullying4 involves customers, clients, suppliers and others beyond the organization who engage in abusive behaviour with employees, manifested as aggressive and intimidating acts, causing the latter physical and emotional strain (D’Cruz and Noronha 2014a, 2015b). Available literature on external bullying focuses largely on customers at the interpersonal level of analysis (Bishop and Hoel 2008; D’Cruz and Noronha 2014a; Hogh et  al. 2011b). Essentially stemming from the ideology of customer sovereignty, other aetiological factors include problems within the service interaction, the bully’s personality or mood and/or the bully’s response to the service worker’s features bringing category-based harassment into play (D’Cruz and Noronha 2014a, 2015b; Korczynski and Evans 2013). Targets experience distress but are constrained to tackle the situation since their employers espouse the norm of customer supremacy, de facto legitimizing customer abuse (Korczynski and Bishop 2008; Yagil 2008). The growing predominance of service work in the contemporary context (D’Cruz 2015a) privileges triadic employment relationships including not just employers and employees but also customers (Korczynski 2002). Table  1.2 brings out the features of internal and external bullying at work at the interpersonal level of analysis, through a comparison of similarities and differences. It must be emphasized that most of our understanding of workplace bullying comes from instances of misbehaviour occurring during face-to-face interactions via proximate physical presence in the real world, also termed in-situ/traditional  See D’Cruz and Noronha (2015a) for the essential features of external bullying at work.

4

6

P. D’Cruz et al.

Table 1.1  Features of interpersonal and depersonalized bullying at work Dimension Source

Interpersonal bullying at work Downwards, upwards, horizontal or cross-level co-bullying Visibility Public and/or private Direct, overt and obvious and/or indirect, subtle and ambiguous Form Real (traditional) and/or virtual (cyber) Aetiology Target characteristics Bully characteristics Work environment factors Target orientation Specific – singling out of a person or group of persons Temporality Power dynamics Outcomes for targets Outcomes for bullies Outcomes for bystanders Outcomes for organizations

Depersonalized bullying at work Downwards Public and/private Direct, overt and obvious and/or indirect, subtle and ambiguous Real (traditional) and/or virtual (cyber) Competitive advantage

General – applied uniformly across all employees of organization or work group Chronic or episodic blocks of time

Usually persistent but also includes single incident Illegitimate personal ‘power’ of bully Blurring of legitimate and illegitimate organizational power Adverse physical and mental health Ambivalence (well-being and strain) or negativity (strain) Growing powerlessness Exit response Mixed depending on aetiology and trajectory Adverse as per current research but anticipated to be mixed depending on stand taken Negative in terms of financial and non-financial indicators

Ambivalence Where bystanders are present, anticipated to be mixed depending on stand taken Anticipated to be mixed

Source: D’Cruz (2015a, p. 60)

bullying (D’Cruz and Noronha 2013a). Yet, the growing reliance on information and communication technologies and devices (ICTDs) at work contemporaneously has resulted in the emergence of workplace cyberbullying or virtual abuse (D’Cruz 2016b; D’Cruz and Noronha 2013a, 2014a, 2017; Farley et al. 2015; Gardner et al. 2016). D’Cruz and Noronha (2013a) define workplace cyberbullying5 as inappropriate and unwanted acts of hostility, intimidation, aggression and harassment via ICTDs, marked by boundarylessness, anonymity, invisibility, concreteness and permanence, with implications for the course of the misbehaviour in terms of pervasiveness, spread, intensity, evidence and persistence, thereby affecting outcomes for victims and other protagonists like perpetrators, bystanders, employers, etc. While virtual abuse at work shares many similarities with its traditional counterpart such as manifestations, sources, aetiology, outcomes, levels of analysis (D’Cruz and Noronha 2013a) and location of misbehaviour (D’Cruz and Noronha 2014a, 2015b), it embodies five specific characteristics, namely, boundarylessness,  See D’Cruz and Noronha (2013a, 2017) for the essential features of cyberbullying at work.

5

1  ‘Varieties of Workplace Bullying’ in India: Towards a Contextualized Understanding

7

Table 1.2  Features of internal/intra-organizational and external/extra-organizational interpersonal bullying at work Dimension Source

Manifestation Mode Aetiology

Internal/intra-­organizational bullying Superiors, peers and/or subordinates individually or in groups Person-related and/or task-related Real (traditional) and/or virtual (cyber) Bully and/or target characteristics Features of workplace One-up-personship

Target orientation Duration

Predatory or dispute-related Specific – singling out of a person or group of persons Usually persistent but also includes single incident

Power

Illegitimate personal ‘power’ of bully

Outcomes for targets

Adverse physical and mental health Growing powerlessness Exit response

Employer redressal options Outcomes for employers

Usually present though effectiveness is variable Negative in terms of financial and non-financial indicators

External/extra-organizational bullying Customers individually or in groups

More person-related than task-related Real (traditional) and/or virtual (cyber) Ideology of customer sovereignty Problems in the service interaction (leading to conflict) Bully and/or target characteristics (may/ may not be linked to customer sovereignty and conflict in the service interaction) Predatory or dispute-related Unclear Persistent in repeated and long-term interactions Single episode in one-time encounters (multiple such experiences during a work day/work week) ‘Legitimate’ power of the customer, triggered and reinforced by employer’s espousal of customer sovereignty and possible presence of depersonalized bullying Adverse physical and mental health Powerlessness Exit response opted for by some targets (with benefits only if fresh employment is in non-service occupations) Usually absent Mixed in terms of financial and non-financial indicators

Source: Derived from D’Cruz and Noronha (2015b)

i­nvisibility, anonymity, concreteness and permanence (D’Cruz 2016b; D’Cruz and Noronha 2013a, 2017). ICTDs allow targets to be subjected to bullying anytime and anywhere since they can be reached across spatial and temporal divides. Boundarylessness makes targets feel ‘haunted and hemmed in’ (D’Cruz and Noronha 2013a, p. 336). As well as not sparing targets’ significant others, the misbehaviour

8

P. D’Cruz et al.

could be shared with people within and outside the workplace, enhancing audience reach. ICTDs as mediated communication lower bully inhibition and accountability due to invisibility and sometimes anonymity. There are occasions when, bullies are never identified. ICTDs give rise to virtual footprints, bringing concreteness and permanence into play. Indeed, the availability of proof helps targets tackle the problem, though even here, organizational dynamics could hamper their endeavour. Nonetheless, replays fuel the persistence of misbehaviour and the possibility of generating evidence prevents counteraggression (D’Cruz and Noronha 2013a, 2017). Interestingly, D’Cruz and Noronha (2018a, b) point out that existing insights into workplace cyberbullying are limited since they are confined to conventional workplaces located in the material world. D’Cruz (2017) and D’Cruz and Noronha (2018a, b) lead the way globally in showing the presence and delineating the features of misbehaviour in digital workplaces. Interpersonal and depersonalized workplace bullying have been found to coexist in instances of internal misbehaviour (D’Cruz and Noronha 2010a, 2014b), a situation termed compounded bullying by D’Cruz, Noronha and Beale (2014, p. 1454). Targets laid off during an organizational change endeavour faced impersonal abuse during the separation phase alongside being singled out for mistreatment by their superiors (D’Cruz et  al. 2014). We use the label dual locus bullying to describe instances where targets experience abuse both internally and externally, that is, from sources within and outside the workplace. This has been evidenced by D’Cruz and Noronha (2015b) where call centre agents experienced downwards bullying within the organization and abuse from overseas customers. Obviously, manifestations of workplace bullying are complex and surpass the mere display of behavioural acts as captured by existing typologies.

1.3  The Indian Situation: Sociocultural Underpinnings Workplace bullying of different varieties has been reported across all sectors of the Indian economy, regardless of organizational size and ownership and of industry (Table 1.3). In the proceeding subsections and paragraphs, we show the interplay between the phenomenon and the Indian ethos drawing on the extant literature from the subcontinent.

1.3.1  Power, Individualism and Materialism D’Cruz and Rayner’s (2013) pioneering national-level survey evidencing workplace bullying in India showed the predominance of downwards bullying (73.1%), a finding supported by later studies (Ciby and Raya 2014; D’Cruz 2015b; D’Cruz et al. 2016; Rai and Agarwal 2017a). Moreover, bullying lessened as one went up the organizational hierarchy, being 48.8% at entry level and 25.5% at senior

1  ‘Varieties of Workplace Bullying’ in India: Towards a Contextualized Understanding

9

Table 1.3  The presence of ‘varieties of workplace bullying’ in India Formal economy Variety of workplace bullying Internal Interpersonal bullying – in-situ/ traditional

Interpersonal bullying – virtual

Details of study Ciby and Raya (2014) D’Cruz (2007)

Specific sector (includes both public and private as Informal indicated in each study) economy IT (Information technology) D’Cruz (2015b), Noronha et al. (2018; unclear if Multiple sectors including interpersonal or finance, transport, depersonalized) development work, manufacturing, defence/civil services, agriculture, retail, power, energy, education and IT and ITES-BPO (IT enabled services-business process outsourcing) ITES-BPO

D’Cruz (2010) D’Cruz and Noronha (2010a, b, 2011, 2012a) D’Cruz and Rayner (2009, 2013) D’Cruz (2015b) Multiple sectors including aviation, banking, telecom, retail, power, energy, infrastructure, pharmaceuticals and IT and ITES-BPO D’Cruz et al. Multiple sectors including (2016) retail, education and government administration/ defence/civil services Gupta et al. Multiple sectors including (2017) education, health, social service, banking and insurance Multiple sectors including Rai and banking, pharmaceuticals, Agarwal manufacturing, retail, (2017a, b, aviation, telecom, energy 2018) and IT IT and ITES-BPO D’Cruz and Noronha (2013a)

D’Cruz (2017), D’Cruz and Noronha (2017, 2018a, b) – in all instances, unclear if internal or external (continued)

10

P. D’Cruz et al.

Table 1.3 (continued) Formal economy Details of study D’Cruz (2015a) DCruz and Noronha (2009, 2013b, 2015a) D’Cruz and Noronha (2014b) D’Cruz et al. (2014) Noronha and Magala (2017) D’Cruz External Interpersonal bullying – in-situ/ (2015b) traditional Interpersonal D’Cruz and bullying – virtual Noronha (2014a, 2015b) Variety of workplace bullying Depersonalized bullying – in-situ/ traditional

Specific sector (includes both public and private as Informal indicated in each study) economy Manufacturing Banday et al. (2017), D’Cruz (2015b), ITES-BPO Noronha and D’Cruz (2018), Noronha et al. (2018; IT unclear if interpersonal or depersonalized) IT IT Aviation

Noronha et al. (2018)

ITES-BPO

D’Cruz (2017), D’Cruz and Noronha (2017, 2018a, b) – in all instances, unclear if internal or external

management (D’Cruz and Rayner 2013). Noronha and Magala (2017) show that even when Indians operate on foreign shores, in this case Dutch, their downwards abusive behaviours towards their compatriots persist. These findings are in line with notions of power that are seen as characterizing Indian society. Indeed, managers prefer the centralization of power, displaying not only a leaning towards hierarchy, tight controls and limited delegation but also a lack of confidence in their subordinates. Subordinates prefer a top-down approach embodying close supervision, restricted autonomy and clear and direct orders and work best under these conditions. Power distance is favoured by both superiors and subordinates (Aycan et al. 1999; Budhwar 2009; D’Cruz et al. 2016), creating a fertile ground for bullying (D’Cruz 2012; D’Cruz and Rayner 2013; D’Cruz et al. 2016). Consistent with this are D’Cruz and Rayner’s (2013) bullying categories which show work-related bullying behaviours as more pronounced in instances where superiors are the source of misbehaviour. It appears that bullying occurs during and is experienced as a part of task performance (D’Cruz and Rayner 2013), but as D’Cruz (2015a) points out, it could be interpersonal bullying or depersonalized bullying depending on the aetiology, target orientation and so on (D’Cruz and Noronha 2009, 2010a, b, 2013a, b, 2014b, 2015a; D’Cruz et al. 2014).

1  ‘Varieties of Workplace Bullying’ in India: Towards a Contextualized Understanding

11

Nonetheless, in keeping with the paternalistic character of Indian society, the Indian workforce appreciates and responds best to nurturant-task leadership (Sinha 1982) where authority and benevolence are combined (Kakar et  al. 2002; Sinha 1982). The leader is thus expected to be authoritative (but not authoritarian) but also caring, like the karta (paternalistic head of the joint family) (Kakar et al. 2002), getting the work done while taking a personal interest in subordinates’ well-being (Sinha 1982). Subordinates are happy to be subservient to and respect authority but expect protection, concern and support from their leader (Kakar et al. 2002; Sinha and Kanungo 1997) whom they idealize as a repository of all virtues and a role model (Kakar et al. 2002). Work is performed diligently as a part of a sneh-shradha (affection-deference) relationship between a dependent subordinate and his/her nurturant superior (Sinha 2002) rather than an intrinsically valued entity (Sinha 1985). Yet, the abuse of power through authoritarianism and coercion (Tripathi 1990) often mars nurturant-task leadership and the sneh-shradha relationship (Sinha 1994a, 1997), as evidenced by the bullying behaviours adopted by managers during an organizational change process (D’Cruz 2015a; D’Cruz et al. 2014) where targets reported experiencing ‘sudden unfamiliarity’ (D’Cruz et al. 2014, p. 12), leading to feelings of being let down and treated unfairly (D’Cruz et al. 2014). Rai and Agarwal (2017b) provide the explanation of psychological contract violation (PCV) in such instances. Leaders may engage in bullying behaviours for various reasons, with both predatory and dispute-related misbehaviour being shown (D’Cruz et  al. 2014, 2016). Protagonist features include subordinate vulnerability and leader self-interest. Bullying subordinates, due to their weak status in terms of abilities, resources and position, trusting and submissive nature, isolation and so on (D’Cruz et al. 2016), goes against the paternalism typically associated with India (Sinha 2015). Bullying due to a personal agenda of asserting one’s own position when feeling threatened by or envious and jealous of subordinates’ competence, wishing to cover up for inferiority and ineffectiveness, trying to displace stress and attempting to manage employee resistance indicates leaders’ individualist and materialist orientations particularly in a resource-poor environment like India (D’Cruz and Noronha 2010a, 2012a, 2013a, 2014b; D’Cruz et al. 2014, 2016). Privileging achievement, progress, status, wealth and so on disputes popular stereotypes of collectivism and s­ piritualism associated with Indian culture (Sinha 2015). D’Cruz et al. (2014) and D’Cruz et al. (2016) demonstrate that favouritism underlies bullying behaviours, hampering perceptions of the leader’s paternalistic orientation. That is, leaders indulge some subordinates over others. Often, this unfolds in terms of alignment with social categories. In other words, while leaders are partial to those with similar or valued social identities, they misbehave with those with different or devalued social identities (Noronha 2005; Noronha and Sharma 2003). Yet, workplace-related factors have also been found as antecedents of leaders’ bullying behaviours. Organizational effectiveness, organizational culture, leadership, performance management, HR (human resource) ideology, work organization, job design and organizational change (Ciby and Raya 2014; D’Cruz 2015a; D’Cruz and Noronha 2009, 2010a, 2013b, 2014b, 2015a; D’Cruz et al. 2014, 2016) have

12

P. D’Cruz et al.

been evidenced as giving rise to interpersonal and/or depersonalized bullying such that compounded bullying may result (D’Cruz 2015a; D’Cruz et  al. 2014). In instances of interpersonal bullying, workplace-related factors may operate in conjunction with protagonists’ factors outlined above. In a first study of bullies in the Indian context, D’Cruz (2015a) shows how managers who engage in depersonalized bullying feel ambivalent about their behaviour. While managers were pleased to further organizational interests and protect their own positions, they were concomitantly distressed by their involuntary adoption of impersonal abusive tactics and the consequent strain experienced by employees. Even so, given the preference for power distance, it is not surprising that bosses who demonstrate powerful and authoritative personalities are more likely to gain the respect of subordinates, with democratic management styles being viewed as a sign of weakness or incompetence (Sinha 1994b). With people finding it easier to work in superior-subordinate roles rather than as equals (Sinha 1982), decision-­ making is centralized and communication tends to be more downwards, favouring in-groups (Sinha 1994b, 1997). Upwards communication is generally ‘adjusted to the status, moods, and the reactions of the superiors, the nature of interpersonal relationships, and the social and professional relationships in the organization’ (Sinha 1994b, p. 749) and precludes critical feedback that would enhance superiors’ personal effectiveness and organizational functioning (Kakar et al. 2002). Further, the development of horizontal relationships, team spirit and collaboration is hampered (Kakar et al. 2002; Sinha 1994b, 2008). This has implications for how targets of workplace bullying perceive and respond to their experiences. D’Cruz et  al.’s (2016) findings highlight that, due to subservience, targets are usually tolerant of bullying behaviours, accepting them as a natural part of work life. Nonetheless, targets do understand and report that they have been subjected to indignity (D’Cruz and Noronha 2015b; Noronha et al. 2018). This means that they can, and do, identify inappropriate and undesirable behaviours even though they may be resigned to their predicament (D’Cruz et al. 2016). Some targets contemplate, and even attempt, actively addressing the situation. But others acquiesce, stay silent and invoke fatalism, well ingrained in the Indian mindset due to the spiritualist orientation stereotypically associated with the subcontinent (D’Cruz and Noronha 2010a, 2012a; D’Cruz et al. 2016). Power is considered to be the reason underlying a typical Indian manifestation of workplace bullying which involves dual dimensions: blaming and victimizing a colleague for failure even where the latter is not responsible, so as to conceal one’s own shortcomings, while prevailing on a colleague to forfeit credit for success even where the latter is the sole or primary contributor, so as to appropriate the appreciation and enhance one’s own standing (D’Cruz 2015b). As part of a study aimed at understanding the specificities of workplace bullying in India, HR managers and employee representatives were asked to add indigenous insights to a list of universally agreed workplace bullying behaviours. Usurping credit and deflecting blame were referred to by almost all participants. This behaviour, which was attributed to superiors’ authority which allowed them to ‘get away with it’ due to their position (D’Cruz and Noronha 2015b), emerged as the only unique bullying behaviour linked to the sub-

1  ‘Varieties of Workplace Bullying’ in India: Towards a Contextualized Understanding

13

continent, with all other manifestations involving universally known person-related and work-related displays (for types of workplace bullying behaviours, see, for example, D’Cruz and Rayner 2013; Gupta et al. 2017). Taking credit and assigning blame in this manner can also be seen as linked to individualism and materialism, with managers wishing to secure and get ahead in their careers in a competitive context. Individualist and materialist orientations are part of the Indian ethos and coexist with collectivism and spiritualism as well as paternalism, nurturant-task leadership and the sneh-shradha relationship (Sinha 2015). Across the aetiological factors that trigger workplace bullying, the contemporary Indian macroeconomic context embedded in the neoliberal capitalist project, marked by North-South dynamics, volatility and competitiveness (Noronha and D’Cruz 2017), is an important backdrop whose influence cannot be discounted (D’Cruz 2015a; D’Cruz and Noronha 2009, 2013b, 2015a). Under such circumstances, both workplaces and employees are engaged in the struggle to survive. Conditions conducive to interpersonal and/or depersonalized bullying, leading on to compounded bullying (D’Cruz et al. 2014), as well as external bullying (D’Cruz and Noronha 2014a), in either in-situ and/or cyber forms (D’Cruz 2015a; D’Cruz and Noronha 2015b), emerge, with instances of actual misbehaviour ensuing.

1.3.2  Conflation with Social Categories Alongside power, individualism and materialism, social categories such as age, kinship, caste, religion, region, class and gender (Beteille 2006; Mehta and Shree 2017; Sinha 2008, 2015; Verma 2004) define Indian society and pervade Indian workplaces, though exceptions do exist (Basu 2008; Noronha 2005). Beteille (2006) points out that while diversity marks the subcontinent, plurality is hierarchically rather than democratically organized. Social categories lead to power dynamics, stereotypes, prejudices and in-group-out-group alignments, with discrimination arising as a result, especially when resources are scarce and entail competition – a situation that is not uncommon in a deprived environment like India where materialism and individualism also drive behaviour (D’Cruz 2012). Instances of misbehaviour cannot be ruled out under the circumstances, though it must be recognized that workplace bullying in India occurs even without any link to social identities (D’Cruz and Noronha 2010a, b, 2011, 2012a, 2013a). Nonetheless, the conflation between workplace bullying and category-based harassment has been evidenced in several studies. D’Cruz and Noronha (2013a) speak of the intermingling of cyberbullying and sexual harassment; D’Cruz and Noronha (2014a, 2015b) highlight the racial dimensions of external bullying; D’Cruz and Noronha (2013a) and D’Cruz et al. (2014) describe the importance of regional affiliations in cases of cyberbullying and depersonalized bullying respectively; and D’Cruz et al. (2016) describe the roles of race, gender, region and religion in targets’ experiences of interpersonal bullying. HR managers and employee representatives interviewed by D’Cruz (2015b) emphasized that social categories such as gender, caste, region, religion, etc. are significant in

14

P. D’Cruz et al.

defining workplace dynamics across the Indian economy and have a bearing on workplace bullying. How and why do social identities affect the Indian workforce? In matters of gender, for example, men continue to espouse patriarchal worldviews, and since they dominate workplaces, these attitudes prevail, further sidelining women (Natasha and Parasuraman 2017). Discrimination against women workers and managers, in the formal and informal and public and private sectors in both urban and rural settings in matters of recruitment, promotion, job security, wages, etc., is commonly reported (Basu 2008; Mehta and Shree 2017; Papola and Sharma 1999) as is sexual harassment at work (D’Cruz and Noronha 2013a, 2015b; Punwani 1997; Tejani 2004), thanks to the persistence of a patriarchal social structure which associates masculinity and instrumentality with men and femininity and affectivity with women (Basu 2008; Bharat 2001; Rege 2003). While this continues even in better paid and high-skilled jobs (Mehta and Shree 2017), it is being aggravated under globalization (Mazumdar 2007; Mukherjee 2004). The decreasing workforce participation rate of women in India is also a matter of concern (World Bank 2017). Moreover, gender biases do not exist in isolation but reflect complex intersectionalities with caste, class, region and so on (Natasha and Parasuraman 2017). Similarly, Banerjee and Knight (1985), Ito (2009), Madheswaran and Attewell (2007), Mehta and Shree (2017), Noronha (2005), Noronha and Sharma (2003), Rao (2017) and Thorat and Attewell (2007) highlight that kinship, caste, region and religion play a critical role in workplace dynamics in terms of resource access and distribution, selection, appraisal, compensation, promotion and confirmation processes as well as performance, productivity and returns in Indian workplaces across rural and urban areas and public and private sectors. They describe the politics of inclusion and exclusion in a hierarchically and relationally networked society where identity-linked social and affective ties, homosocial sponsorship and prejudice and stereotypes promote partisan and discriminatory practices. Alongside this are the dominant positions occupied by the relatively small but powerful affluent and middle classes, reflecting the bias and gains of privilege (Dreze and Sen 2013). Disadvantaged social groups such as SCs (scheduled castes), STs (scheduled tribes) and large sections of OBCs (other backward classes) are mostly concentrated in low-productivity sectors and low-paying jobs, while Muslims are concentrated in low-productivity self-employment (India Labour and Employment Report [ILER] 2014). Dreze and Sen (2013) note that the entrenched class division between the privileged and the underprivileged reflects the mutual reinforcement of different types of disparities of gender, caste and religion. Jodhka and Newman (2007) point out that, in spite of a globalizing economy with concomitant emphasis on merit in recruitment as cited by private sector employers, potential employees’ caste, class and geographical location (proxied by family background) and region continue to affect selection processes, while Kar and Sakthivel’s (2007) and Sanga and Shaban’s (2017) work on growing regional inequalities under economic liberalization indicates that regional identities are set to assume greater salience. Banerjee and Knight (1985), Dreze and Sen (2013), Madheswaran and Attewell (2007), Mehta and Shree (2017), Natasha and Parasuraman (2017), Noronha (2005), Papola and Sharma (1999) and Saini (2009) highlight that government interventions

1  ‘Varieties of Workplace Bullying’ in India: Towards a Contextualized Understanding

15

via constitutional, legal, policy and institutional measures in the post-Independence period to promote inclusion in the country in general and the workforce in particular have had limited effectiveness in resolving existing social challenges. On the contrary, there is evidence to show that government interventions have resulted in further polarization of in-group and out-group identities in response to perceptions of increasing scarcity of opportunities and resources (Dreze and Sen 2013; Noronha 2005). Materialism in such instances acquires a collectivist twist as social categories seek to garner opportunities and resources for their own members. Intra-group dynamics may of course bring in sub-group differences, interpersonal complications, individualism and so on (Noronha 2005; Noronha and Sharma 2003). Race as a social category conflated with workplace bullying also affects the Indian workforce as D’Cruz et  al.’s study (2016) on expatriate targets and D’Cruz and Noronha’s (2014a, 2015b) studies on external bullying show. North-South divisions of ethnicity and class, accentuated by the dynamics of global capitalism (Mirchandani 2012), underlie target experiences. Yet, the need for a livelihood, linked at a basic level to survival and at an advanced level to upwards mobility, both of which reflect materialism, plays an important role in targets’ choice of coping with aversive racism, making room only for routine resistance and emotion-focused strategies (D’Cruz 2015a, 2016a, b; D’Cruz and Noronha 2009, 2013b, 2014a, 2015b). A pertinent result of D’Cruz and Rayner (2013, p.  607) is ‘cross-level co-­ bullying’ showing that it is very rare for subordinates and peers to bully on their own, with managers also being indicated alongside as a source of bullying in 94% and 75% of the cases respectively. This explains why horizontal and upwards bullying are so high in the Indian context, emphasizing the significance of superiors being the dominant source of abuse, in line with the hierarchical nature of society in the subcontinent (D’Cruz and Rayner 2013). Cross-level co-bullying may be accounted for in two ways which can intermingle. One, while such a situation invokes the conventional notion of mobbing (Leymann 1996), group formation is expected to be closely linked to sociocultural factors, being the outcome of membership to social categories which define individual identity and pervade workplaces such that in-group-out-group distinctions and exchanges become relevant (D’Cruz and Rayner 2013). Thus, to illustrate, a superior and a subordinate from the same region may bully a colleague from another region. Similarly, a superior and a peer from the same caste may misbehave with a colleague belonging to another caste usually lower in the hierarchy. Further, membership to various social categories either similar to or valued by the superior determines the nature and degree of bonding in the superior-subordinate relationship (Noronha 2005; Noronha and Sharma 2003; Sinha 1985). Two, given that sycophancy and ingratiation are considered to be the appropriate means of influence with leaders and are extensively used by employees to maximize their gains (Bohra and Pandey 1984; Pandey 1981; Pandey and Singh 1986), peers and subordinates may participate in bullying behaviours targeting co-­workers as a means of pleasing and currying favours with their bosses. Resembling apple-polishing, boot-licking and other similar forms of flattery which trigger nepotism, sycophancy and ingratiation benefit both bosses and subordinates, bringing in individualism and materialism (D’Cruz

16

P. D’Cruz et al.

and Noronha 2012b). Superiors feel more powerful and appreciate the attention and flattery. In turn, subordinates’ employment continuity and security and career growth and success are ensured with access to undue resources also being facilitated (Pandey 1981; Pandey and Singh 1987). As mentioned earlier, both factors can fuse. Employees may align themselves with superiors from their own social categories not just because of affiliation arising from similarity but also because of possible job-related gains arising due to both shared identity and sycophancy. Interestingly, D’Cruz and Rayner’s (2013) bullying categories show that, in instances of cross-level co-bullying (as well as horizontal and upwards bullying), person-related bullying behaviours predominate. It could be quite the case that ICTDs facilitate upwards bullying on an exclusive basis as D’Cruz and Noronha (2013a) evidence. The use of anonymous e-mails and social media sites is an example described by D’Cruz and Noronha (2013a). While the anonymity and invisibility afforded by ICTDs embolden subordinates’ behaviour (D’Cruz and Noronha 2013a, 2017), the role of changing social dynamics reflecting Noronha and Magala’s (2017) stand that culture is in a state of constant evolution cannot be discounted. Greater exposure to Western schema and higher dissatisfaction with the Indian ethos could affect subordinates’ (and peers’ for that matter) behaviour such that tilts towards individualism, egalitarianism, assertiveness, self-interest and materialism, or even frustration and disillusionment, lead them to engage in bullying acts on their own without the accompanying presence of a superior, in a bid to pursue their own agendas and/or safeguard their own dignity.

1.3.3  S  train/Ambivalence, Subservience and Fatalism Versus Dignity, Agency and Well-Being Adverse outcomes for targets of interpersonal bullying at both personal and professional levels are reported. These include fear, anxiety, depression, meaninglessness, anger, headaches, gastrointestinal problems, influenza, sleep disruption, alienation from and disinterest in work, poor task performance, low job satisfaction and commitment (Ciby and Raya 2014; D’Cruz and Noronha 2010a, b, 2013a; D’Cruz et al. 2016), reduced work engagement (Gupta et al. 2017; Rai and Agarwal 2017b, 2018) and burnout (Gupta et  al. 2017). It is not uncommon for bystanders, particularly those who are supportive towards the target, to report similar consequences (D’Cruz and Noronha 2011; D’Cruz et al. 2016). While emotional disturbance marks targets’ experience of external bullying (D’Cruz and Noronha 2015b), ambivalence characterizes targets’ response to depersonalized bullying (D’Cruz and Noronha 2015a). Targets report simultaneous distress over their oppressive work environment and appreciation over job-related gains, acknowledging that their continuity in the situation is due to their need for survival and mobility in an environment marked by scarce resources and high competitiveness (D’Cruz 2015a). Materialism is an obvious consideration for targets (D’Cruz and Noronha 2015a). Yet, in instances of

1  ‘Varieties of Workplace Bullying’ in India: Towards a Contextualized Understanding

17

adverse consequences, engaging in identity work helps targets regain equilibrium, maintain existential continuity and stability and overcome a traumatic life-changing experience to realize positive outcomes such as personal growth, resilience, forgiveness and so on which lead to well-being (see D’Cruz and Noronha 2012a for details, also D’Cruz and Noronha 2018a). As mentioned earlier, members of the workforce have an inherent sense of dignity (D’Cruz and Noronha 2015b; Noronha et al. 2018) which leads them to identify bullying as such. Though subservience and fatalism can make targets passive (D’Cruz et al. 2016), there is evidence of targets’ agency as shown by D’Cruz (2016b) and D’Cruz and Noronha (2010a, b, 2013a, b, 2014a, 2015b, 2017) in terms of how targets resist their experiences and seek mastery and control. This re-theorizes the understanding of power in workplace bullying (D’Cruz 2016b; D’Cruz and Noronha 2013b, 2017). Rather than being a unidimensional and functional entity, power in workplace bullying, regardless of the variety, is dialectical and polymorphous (D’Cruz and Noronha 2013b; Lutgen-Sandvik 2006). Following Giddens and Foucault, it is clear that all actors have access to certain rules and resources of control to greater or lesser degrees such that power and resistance provide permanent limits for each other and employees with knowledgeable agency mobilize resources and carve out spaces of autonomy for themselves (D’Cruz 2016b, D’Cruz and Noronha 2013b, 2017). The agency of targets and bystanders cannot be overlooked (Lutgen-Sandvik 2006). It appears that the attempt to preserve one’s sense of self and protect one’s dignity reflects shades of individualism as well as, where such endeavours are undertaken jointly, collectivism.

1.3.4  P  roblem-Focused Coping, Organizational Options, Collectivization and Litigation Targets of workplace bullying do make attempts to find solutions to their predicament. In addition to sometimes directly talking to bullies and threatening to file formal complaints, they resort to available organizational options (D’Cruz and Noronha 2010a, 2013a; D’Cruz et al. 2016). D’Cruz (2012) provides insights into the range of interventions at primary, secondary and tertiary levels that organizations provide including anti-bullying policies, training and awareness, redress mechanisms, psychosocial assistance and so on (see D’Cruz 2012, chapter 2, for details). Yet, interestingly, targets in D’Cruz et al.’s (2016) study reported that grievance procedures are not always present in Indian workplaces, pointing to gaps in employment relations practices, though HR managers insist that organizations institute redress mechanisms (D’Cruz 2015b). In keeping with the international literature (Karatuna 2015; Thirlwall 2015), it is often the case that targets who seek organizational redress, whether formal or informal, face further victimization to the point of finally quitting their jobs (D’Cruz and Noronha, 2010a, b). Perceptions of interactional, procedural and distributive injustice were reported (D’Cruz and Noronha 2010a, b). Most of the workplace dynamics which lead to such an outcome

18

P. D’Cruz et al.

such as organizational culture, nexus between the HR department and management, processual lapses, micropolitical behaviour, victim-blaming, etc. (D’Cruz and Noronha 2010a, b) are found to be similar across the globe (Karatuna 2015; Thirlwall 2015). This raises the question of whether crossvergence (Ralston et al. 1993), observed in other Indian organizations (Budhwar 2009; D’Cruz and Noronha 2012b), is relevant (D’Cruz et al. 2014). Since Indian workplaces remain feudalistic (Budhwar 2009) despite Western notions of industrialism (Blumer 1965; Moore 1966) linked to the earlier colonial rule (Noronha 2005) and the current globalizing environment (D’Cruz and Noronha 2012b), it is possible that the culturalist thesis persists in the face of universalist influences. Aycan et al. (1999) and Budhwar (2009) point out that human resource management (HRM) practices operate within this paradoxical ethos, raising questions about the extent and nature of employee advocacy which is pursued and underscoring the presence of rhetoric, a point emphasized by D’Cruz and Noronha (2010a, 2011) in their studies on the interface between workplace bullying and target coping and workplace bullying and bystander behaviour and by D’Cruz et al. (2014) in their study on the interface between workplace bullying and organizational change. This signals complications for the relevance and operationalization of psychosocial safety climate in Indian organizations, a concept often invoked in the context of workplace bullying (Law et al. 2011). D’Cruz et al.’s (2016) findings bear this out, showing that targets express lack of confidence in filing formal complaints where the option is available, harbouring misgivings about their own positions and the backing of bystanders due to the power of the bully, nexus between the bully, the HR department and management, indifferent organizational culture and apathetic top management (D’Cruz and Noronha 2010a, b). A pro-employee HR department, virtuous leadership and an ethical organizational climate are critical to a viable psychosocial safety climate orientation in the workplace (D’Cruz and Noronha 2015b; D’Cruz et al. 2014). To this end, D’Cruz and Noronha (2016) propose the adoption of organizational governance as the most appropriate and comprehensive means by which workplace bullying can be addressed. Engendering the systems and processes by which companies are directed and controlled in order to facilitate their responsible functioning where power is legitimately used, o­ rganizational governance seeks to ensure the optimal and ethical functioning of workplaces (Solomon 2007; Tricker 2009), with a resolve against counterproductive dynamics at work. International and national codes of organizational governance translate into firmlevel initiatives facilitating primary, secondary and tertiary interventions at micro and macro levels that keep workplaces in check (see D’Cruz and Noronha 2016 for detailed suggestions). Interestingly, the digital footprints left behind by some modes of cyberbullying have been found to aid targets’ attempts at problem-focused coping through personal initiatives and organizational options, often helping targets to remain in the same organization (D’Cruz 2016b; D’Cruz and Noronha 2013a, 2017). Some targets speak directly to their bullies, alluding to the proof they have. Other targets show the proof to their superiors or HR managers. On both counts, these acts help resolve the situation. Being able to successfully adopt a proactive stand helps targets feel

1  ‘Varieties of Workplace Bullying’ in India: Towards a Contextualized Understanding

19

empowered and experience a sense of well-being (D’Cruz 2016b; D’Cruz and Noronha 2013a, 2017). This attests to the view that notwithstanding their subservient nature and their fatalistic outlook, Indians have an inherent sense of dignity which, while tolerating and making excuses for misbehaviour, recognize it as undesirable and even unacceptable, and hence display and pursue mastery and internal loci of control (D’Cruz and Noronha 2015b; Noronha et al. 2018). Indeed, it is not as if those at the lower levels of social category hierarchies do not acknowledge and resent the misbehaviours directed towards them. It is more that the degree and contours of their disenfranchisement hamper their endeavours towards agency (Harriss-­ White 2017). Moreover, there are instances of targets being reluctant to approach the HR department and management in spite of the digital footprints they have – organizational dynamics in terms of organizational culture, nexus between the HR department and management, micropolitical behaviour, etc. fail to inspire confidence that the presence of evidence will outweigh other factors and address the situation (D’Cruz and Noronha 2013a). So also is the case of external bullying where the entrenchment of the ideology of customer sovereignty precludes the availability of any organizational options for targets (D’Cruz and Noronha 2014a). Targets of workplace bullying in the formal sector show divergent reactions to the collectivization option (D’Cruz and Noronha 2010a, 2013a; D’Cruz and Rayner 2013; D’Cruz et al. 2014). Those in old economy sectors where a history of unionism exists consider it an alternative (D’Cruz 2015a, b). But among the new economy workforce, unionism is seen as irrelevant, being perceived as a low-status issue (D’Cruz et  al. 2014; D’Cruz and Rayner 2013; Noronha and D’Cruz 2009a, b). Indeed, targets in D’Cruz et al.’s (2016) study did not refer to union action as an option at all. Where workers from the informal sector have unions, NGOs (non-­ governmental organizations) or other entities which help them organize, representations about workplace bullying are secondary to those linked to working conditions, especially wages, as well as physical violence and sexual harassment which get greater priority over emotional abuse. The conditions of exploitation in the informal sector often accentuate workers’ response of fatalism to their experiences of workplace bullying (D’Cruz 2015b). On the one hand, many Indians express a growing apathy towards unions, with the state supporting an anti-collectivization stance in order to ensure a favourable industrial relations climate. This is even though the Indian Constitution lists the freedom of association as a fundamental right (D’Cruz and Rayner 2013; Noronha and D’Cruz 2009a, b). It is not surprising then that union strength is declining (Noronha 2003). On the other hand, NGOs, social movements, self-help groups, etc. play a critical role in advocating for and safeguarding the interests of the informal workforce (D’Cruz 2015b, 2017). It is not uncommon for collectivization endeavours, which purport to protect employee interests, to be affected by sociocultural dynamics such as power struggles, personalized, identity-based and hierarchical relationships, individualism, materialism and so on, resulting in their efficacy being compromised (D’Cruz 2015b, 2016a; Noronha 2005; Venkataratnam 2009). Moreover, unions are known to ignore caste-related concerns which mean that targets in such instances are deprived of this option (Aravind 2017).

20

P. D’Cruz et al.

Litigation is hardly considered by targets of workplace bullying (D’Cruz and Rayner 2013; D’Cruz and Noronha 2010a, 2013a; D’Cruz et al. 2014). This is not surprising given that legal and judicial processes, enacted within and influenced by the complex Indian social context where power struggles and personalized, identity-­ based and hierarchical interactions are relevant factors, do not always uphold principles of justice, apart from temporal delays, exorbitant costs and corrupt practices as well as ad hocism and inconsistency (D’Cruz and Rayner 2013; Dreze and Sen 2013; Krishnan 2003; Sinha 2008; Venkataratnam 2009). Moreover, targets do not wish to pursue legal action since they do not wish to spoil their reputation and hamper their opportunities in the job market, and hence when they face harassment, they just move to new jobs sometimes without even engaging intra-organizational options to resolve the issue (D’Cruz and Rayner 2013). Indeed, the absence of specific anti-bullying legislation in the subcontinent need not be a deterrent as targets can rely on legislations against sexual-, gender-, caste-, religious-, disability- and chronic, stigmatizing illness-related discrimination at work as well as laws guaranteeing employee rights at work (D’Cruz 2016a; D’Cruz and Rayner 2013) to fight their case. Yet, targets are known to seek legal recourse only after a certain threshold/level of violation has been crossed (i.e. when they face transfer, suspension, termination and/or other forms of extreme unfairness). Before that, they live with the problem, relying on spiritualism, fatalism, social support, etc. (D’Cruz 2016a), if other means of resolution are ineffective (D’Cruz and Rayner 2013). D’Cruz’s (2015b) study shows that HR managers and employee representatives are divided about the relevance of a specific anti-bullying legislation. Those in favour believe that a legislation is important to tackle the problem especially since its scope can include all varieties of workplace bullying and the entire workforce, in contrast to available category-specific legislation and labour laws which are limited to particular issues and particular employees. Those against hold that there are innumerable available legislations which can tackle the problem and it is the effectiveness of the legal and judicial process and the commitment of organizations that are critical to dealing with workplace bullying (D’Cruz 2015b).

1.3.5  E  motion-Focused Coping, Spiritualism and Social Support Targets’ problem-focused coping is obviously constrained (D’Cruz and Noronha 2010a, b, 2015a, b; D’Cruz et al. 2016) as has also been shown in the Western literature (Karatuna 2015; Thirlwall 2015), though workplace cyberbullying may be an exception when virtual footprints are available (D’Cruz 2016b; D’Cruz and Noronha 2013a). Consequently, then, targets have little choice but to engage emotion-focused coping. Refraining from voicing their problems, targets select silence and rely on cognitive restructuring, compartmentalization, affective blunting, inner strength, spiritualism and social support (D’Cruz and Noronha 2010a, 2010b, 2013a, b, 2015a, b; D’Cruz et  al. 2014). This is further reinforced by Rai and Agarwal’s

1  ‘Varieties of Workplace Bullying’ in India: Towards a Contextualized Understanding

21

(2018) finding that employees opt for silence as a passive coping mechanism. Emotion-focused strategies have been reported by bystanders as well, particularly those who sympathize with targets (D’Cruz and Noronha 2011; D’Cruz et al. 2016). Spiritualism constitutes a stereotypical characteristic of Indian society, coexisting with collectivism-individualism, personalized and identity-based hierarchical relationships-­humanism and materialism (Sinha 2015). Involving fatalism, reflection and meditation, sometimes with religious roots, spiritualism facilitates coping in a variety of ways. It helps targets seek and find answers to their predicament, allows them to transcend the negativity they are subjected to, brings in a sense of calmness and peace, aids them in maintaining their principles and so on (see D’Cruz and Noronha 2012a for details). All targets describe the help and assistance they receive (Ciby and Raya 2014; D’Cruz and Noronha 2010a, 2011, 2012a, 2013a, 2015b, 2017; D’Cruz et al. 2014, 2016), evidencing the humanist and collectivist tenor of Indian society where emotional, material, informational and other forms of support are not uncommon (Sinha 2015). Being listened to, comforted, advised and treated with understanding and affection are reported (D’Cruz 2010a, 2012a; D’Cruz et  al. 2016). D’Cruz and Noronha (2011) in a significant contribution about bystanders (where these protagonists rather than targets were the actual sources of data [e.g. Rai and Agarwal 2017a; van Heugten 2011]) draw attention to the role of workplace friendship in workplace bullying. Obviously, having friends at work means that targets will be supported, though the fear of undesirable consequences such as being victimized, losing one’s job, etc. limits the help the former provide. Yet, D’Cruz and Noronha’s (2011) identification of workplace friendship brings out the importance of contextualizing bystander behaviour, acknowledging bystanders’ dilemmas and recognizing the workplace as a web of relationships as well as the relevance of managerialism in curtailing the support targets can receive. Overt indifference and silence and covert support mark the behaviour of friends and sympathetic bystanders at work. Indeed, bystanders who are not targets’ friends espouse silence or actively support bullies (D’Cruz and Noronha 2011) while, more recently, the moderating role of workplace friendship on target outcomes has been reported (Rai and Agarwal 2018). Bystander behaviour obviously evidences varying degrees of self-interest (D’Cruz and Noronha 2011), fuelled by individualism and materialism (D’Cruz, 2016a). Of course, the position of bystanders could vary in instances of workplace cyberbullying, depending on the form, mode and boundarylessness involved as D’Cruz and Noronha (2013a, 2017) show. Collegial work environments, often embodying routine resistance, were found to be instrumental in facilitating target coping with depersonalized bullying and external bullying (D’Cruz and Noronha 2013b, 2015a, b). Beyond the workplace, family and significant others serve as anchors, providing empathy and advice that help targets work through their trauma (D’Cruz and Noronha 2010a, 2012a, 2013a, 2018a; D’Cruz et  al. 2014, 2016). Thus, though personalized, identity-based and hierarchical interactions privileging networks and exchanges temper the humanist orientation considered to be typical of Indian society (Sinha 2015), bringing in fractures and divisions, a relational and collectivist orientation persists (D’Cruz 2016a). Even so, it is rare for Indian targets

22

P. D’Cruz et al.

to turn to formal professional support not just because seeking interventions such as counselling and psychiatric help, etc. is stigmatized but also because such services are not widely available in India within or beyond workplaces (D’Cruz et al. 2016). It is important to note that, given the fluidity of relational boundaries in India, it is not surprising that bullies sometimes misbehave with targets’ significant others, often aided by ICTDs (D’Cruz and Noronha 2013a). Targets’ adoption of emotion-focused coping is linked to the fear of losing employment in a limited job market and resource-poor environment where competition for livelihoods, security, mobility and success is high, indicating the primacy accorded to materialism (D’Cruz and Noronha 2015a, b, 2018a), an apprehension which also explains bystanders’ covert support to targets, silence and/or collusion with bullies (D’Cruz and Noronha 2011; D’Cruz et al. 2016). Yet, as D’Cruz (2016b) and D’Cruz and Noronha (2010a) show, even emotion-focused responses, commonly considered maladaptive and passive, actually aid target mastery and so facilitate target well-being, catalysing the re-theorization of the problem-focused-emotion-focused dichotomy in coping research. Alongside power distance, subservience, fatalism and spiritualism which are features of Indian culture, therefore, are notions of internal loci of control. Obviously, Indians espouse agency and seek empowerment (D’Cruz 2016b; D’Cruz and Noronha 2013b, 2017), displaying their resilience (D’Cruz and Noronha 2012a, 2018a). This duality is evident across all sections of Indian society. Even disenfranchised groups through their own initiative and perseverance as well as through the initiatives of sympathetic and committed outsiders stand up against the mistreatment meted out to them (Harriss-­ White 2017). This observation has several implications. First, it underscores the thesis that dignity is an inherent quality that humans seek to preserve. By and large, humans do not fail to recognize and react to indignities imposed on them, though their responses may be influenced by their particular situation (D’Cruz and Noronha 2015b; Noronha et  al. 2018). Second, it highlights the contradictions that mark Indian society, reiterating the relevance of metaphorical (Gannon and Pillai 2013) rather than dimensional (Steers et al. 2013) frameworks, or a combination of both, as adopted by D’Cruz et al. (2016), to guide country studies. Metaphorical frameworks also tie in with the idea that culture is dynamic and negotiated rather than static and given (Noronha and Magala 2017). Third, it coheres with the emergent perspective in workplace bullying studies that, rather than being defenceless and powerless, targets find several ways by which to resist, maintain their autonomy and gain mastery over adverse circumstances (D’Cruz 2016b; D’Cruz and Noronha 2013b, 2017; Lutgen-Sandvik 2006). The nuances of sociocultural dynamics vis-à-vis workplace bullying in India, as detailed above, reinforce D’Cruz’s (2012, 2016a) argument that the ethos in the subcontinent constitutes a paradox. The coexistence of humanist, spiritualist and collectivist orientations, stereotypically associated with Indian society with personalized, identity-based and hierarchical relationships, materialism and individualism simultaneously recognizes and denies, nurtures and quells as well as addresses and overlooks the phenomenon of emotional abuse at work (D’Cruz 2012, 2016a). Undoubtedly, accurate insights into workplace bullying in India will emerge only if

1  ‘Varieties of Workplace Bullying’ in India: Towards a Contextualized Understanding

23

sociocultural considerations inform empirical inquiries, necessitating an interdisciplinary perspective which allows for holistic and contextualized theoretical frameworks and commensurate research designs. To this end, we believe that consultation of either metaphorical frameworks, as elaborated on by D’Cruz (2016a), or combinations of metaphorical and dimensional frameworks, as demonstrated by D’Cruz et al. (2016), will facilitate a precise representation of the complexities that inhere in the Indian sociocultural environment. The concomitant inclusion of multiple academic disciplines accompanied by the adoption of suitable ontological and epistemological paradigms will enhance the validity of the studies. This approach becomes all the more relevant when research findings are channelized towards action, as such endeavours facilitate a realistic portrayal of cultural intricacies, serving as an appropriate backdrop from which the phenomenon can be understood and then addressed (see also D’Cruz et  al. 2018). Indeed, recommendations for intervention acquire greater utility and promise higher effectiveness when they are linked to inquiries that are contextually anchored and mirror ground realities. In advocating our position, we note D’Cruz’s (2016a) caution that while the low literacy rate in the country necessitates reliance on interviews and observations rather than questionnaires as methods of data collection, the numerous languages spoken in India have fall-outs for matters of parity and consistency in understanding, communication and interpretation. Methodological issues emerge as not only is the use of behavioural measures constrained, but also the need for accurate and interchangeable translations is complicated.

1.4  F  urthering Our Insights into Workplace Bullying in India A decade of research on workplace bullying in India has yielded considerable pathbreaking, rich and contextualized insights, leading to an established area of inquiry. The chapters in this volume, encompassing different disciplinary perspectives and ontological and epistemological standpoints and covering various sectors of the Indian economy, progress the existing understanding. Mariam Ciby and R.P. Raya, studying the IT sector, focus on target’s physical ill-­health as an outcome of workplace bullying, testing the mediating role of negative emotions (NE) and the moderating role of perceived organizational support (POS). Their findings show that negative emotions partially mediate the relationship between workplace bullying and physical ill-health while POS moderates the direct relationship between workplace bullying and physical ill-health in the presence of the mediator. While highlighting the effects of workplace bullying on physical illhealth in terms of exhaustion, sleep, headaches and so on, Ciby and Raya draw attention to the psychosomatic model of workplace bullying, emphasizing the role of negative affectivity. Further, by examining POS in the context of workplace bullying, Ciby and Raya point out various implications for action.

24

P. D’Cruz et al.

Nidhi Mishra, Premilla D’Cruz, Parvinder Gupta and Ernesto Noronha show forgiveness as a new response which helps targets of workplace bullying overcome harm, experience healing and move towards well-being. Examining the lived experiences of IT and ITES-BPO employees, Mishra et  al.’s findings highlight three themes, namely, genuine forgiveness, moving on without forgiving and maintaining unforgiveness. While targets reported positive outcomes regardless of the specificity of their forgiveness response, genuine forgiveness and moving on without forgiving portrayed elements of both spiritualism and materialism, thereby underscoring the complex sociocultural fabric of Indian society. Making an original contribution to the field of workplace bullying worldwide, the study points out how targets’ engagement with forgiveness evidences the relevance of going beyond a narrow focus on adverse outcomes to embrace intrapsychic states. Arpana Rai and Upasna Agarwal, focusing on managers across various sectors of the economy, draw on social exchange theory (SET) and the job demands-resources (JD-R) model in their inquiry. They forward psychological contract violation as an explanation of the bullying-outcomes relationship. Their study examines how workplace bullying is linked to work outcomes such as innovative work behaviour (IWB) and intention to quit (ITQ) via the mediating role of psychological contract violation (PCV) linked to SET and the moderating role of psychosocial safety climate (PSC) linked to the JD-R model. While workplace bullying negatively correlated with IWB and positively correlated with ITQ, PCV was found to mediate the bullying-outcome relationship, though PSC showed a reverse buffer effect. Rai and Agarwal refer to cognitive dissonance theory to explain their counter-intuitive findings about PSC. Richa Gupta and Arti Bakhshi, whose study is situated in the human services sector, explore the role of employee strengths in mitigating the negative effects of workplace bullying. Gupta and Bakhshi examine the relationship between workplace bullying and organizational well-being (OWB) by employing a moderated mediation model of psychological capital (PsyCap) and burnout, rooted in SET and conservation of resources (COR) theory. Specifically, the role of burnout as a mediator and PsyCap as a moderator in the relationship between bullying and OWB is analysed. Whereas an indirect association was found between workplace bullying and OWB via burnout, PsyCap weakened the positive relationship between bullying and burnout. The moderated mediation association between workplace bullying and OWB was upheld since PsyCap was found to moderate the indirect negative effects of bullying on OWB. Ernesto Noronha and Premilla D’Cruz’s pioneering inquiry on bullying in digital workplaces not only brings a new work context into the substantive area but also progresses insights into the interface between emotional abuse and the informal economy. By studying the experiences of freelancers on online labour markets (OLM) and analysing their narratives through a priori categories identified from the literature on bullying in conventional workplaces, Noronha and D’Cruz showcase the features of bullying in digital workplaces and compare these with conventional workplaces. The specific focus here is cyberbullying due to attention towards virtual

1  ‘Varieties of Workplace Bullying’ in India: Towards a Contextualized Understanding

25

workplaces. Moreover, their findings which advance understanding into the positive relationship between workplace bullying and non-standard employment are particularly pertinent to India where a disproportionate part of the workforce is engaged in the informal economy. Muneeb ul Lateef Banday, Saikat Chakraborty, Premilla D’Cruz and Ernesto Noronha bring a new frontier to the substantive area internationally by presenting the first empirical study on workplace bullying in the context of child labour. Moreover, they further extend insights in the field of workplace bullying through their focus on agriculture, the rural economy and informal employment. Studying child workers below 18 years of age migrating from Rajasthan to work on Bt cottonseed farms in Gujarat, Banday, Chakraborty, D’Cruz and Noronha highlight that, as well as being exploited, child workers face physical violence, bullying and sexual harassment from farmers. Their experiences violate international UN (United Nations) and ILO (International Labour Organization) conventions and Indian regulations on child rights and child labour. Class and caste/tribal identities (as well as gender), alongside corruption, inadequate oversight of the agricultural and informal sectors and successful resistance of perpetrators and their allies against concerted efforts to curb child labour play an important role. The chapter’s seminal contributions, among others, include redefining age within the field of workplace bullying and reconceptualizing the manifestations of workplace bullying. Avina Mendonca, Premilla D’Cruz and Ernesto Noronha, who investigate the customer abuse encountered by beauty service workers employed in unisex salon chains, make novel theoretical contributions to the concept of external bullying at work, progressing insights into aetiology and power dynamics. Taking into account the stigmatized nature of beauty service work, they note that employees in salons experience customer abuse because of the occupational features of a low-skilled, low-status and sexualized job, in addition to the unequal power relationship between them and their customers arising from the notion of customer sovereignty. Employees endure and overcome the abuse due to favourable aspects of their jobs, namely, occupational, organizational and contextual factors which make beauty ­service work a high-profile offering due to its commercial, professional and branded setting. Mendonca, D’Cruz and Noronha bring out the influences of gender, caste and regional identity, important social categories in the Indian context. Aditya Jain’s chapter is the first comprehensive attempt at policy interventions on workplace bullying in India. Based on literature and primary data gathered from representatives of governmental organizations, trade unions and employer organizations at the national level and multilateral agencies at the international level, Jain speaks to the issue of psychosocial risks and aggression at work. He points out that even though many international organizations and national governments in the developed world have devised measures and programmes to deal with workplace bullying and harassment, which include both legal/legislative and non-regulatory approaches, the important level of policy interventions on workplace bullying in developing countries has been largely ignored. The significance of Jain’s study cannot be overlooked as he identifies key needs and priorities, legislative and policy

26

P. D’Cruz et al.

Table 1.4  The chapters of this volume vis-à-vis ‘varieties of workplace bullying’ Interpersonal bullying

Conventional workplace (all studies focused on in-situ/traditional bullying)

Formal economy Internal to organization Ciby and Raya Mishra et al. (including some cases of depersonalized bullying and cyberbullying) Rai and Agarwal Gupta and Bakhshi

External to organization Mendonca et al.

Informal economy

Depersonalized bullying Informal economy Internal to workplace Banday, Chakraborty et al.

D’Cruz and Noronha (internal and external cannot be distinguished due to the work context) Jain – Recommendations regarding interventions applicable to all varieties of workplace bullying Digital workplace (the study focused on cyberbullying due to the work context)

frameworks, good practices and methodologies of intervention in the workplace, relevant to the national context. Table 1.4 places the chapters in relation to D’Cruz and Noronha’s (2016) ‘varieties of workplace bullying’ conceptualization. Ciby and Raya and Mishra, D’Cruz, Gupta and Noronha look at target responses in terms of individual implications. Rai and Agarwal and Gupta and Bakhshi investigate target responses in terms of organizational implications. These four chapters speak to interpersonal bullying in a ­traditional form from an internal source in conventional workplaces. While Noronha and D’Cruz report targets’ experiences of interpersonal bullying in digital workplaces highlighting cyberbullying in a virtual work context, Banday, Chakraborty, D’Cruz and Noronha describe targets’ experiences of traditional depersonalized abuse from internal sources in a conventional work context. Mendonca, D’Cruz and Noronha elaborate on external bullying of a traditional form at the interpersonal level in a conventional workplace. Jain’s findings and suggestions about interventions hold relevance for all the varieties of workplace bullying.

1  ‘Varieties of Workplace Bullying’ in India: Towards a Contextualized Understanding

27

References Aravind, I. (2017, September 24–30). This is caste violence. The Economic Times. Aycan, Z., Kanungo, R. N., & Sinha, J. B. P. (1999). Organisational culture and human resource management: The model of culture fit. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30(4), 501–526. Banday, M.  U. L., Chakraborty, S., Noronha, E., & D’Cruz, P. (2017). Working conditions in Indian agriculture. Project report. Ahmedabad: IIM Ahmedabad. Banerjee, B., & Knight, J.  B. (1985). Caste discrimination in the Indian urban labour market. Journal of Development Economics, 17(3), 277–307. Basu, S. (2008). Gender stereotypes in corporate India. New Delhi: Sage. Béteille, A. (2006). Ideology and social science. New Delhi: Penguin. Bharat, S. (2001). On the periphery: The psychology of gender. In J. Pandey (Ed.), Psychology in India revisited (pp. 300–355). New Delhi: Sage. Bishop, V., & Hoel, H. (2008). The customer is always right? Exploring the concept of customer bullying in the British employment service. Journal of Consumer Culture, 8(3), 341–367. Blumer, H. (1965). Industrialisation and race relations. In G. Hunter (Ed.), Industrialization and race relations: A symposium (pp. 220–253). London: Oxford University Press. Bohra, K. A., & Pandey, J. (1984). Ingratiation toward strangers, friends, and bosses. The Journal of Social Psychology, 122(2), 217–222. Branch, S., Ramsay, S., & Barker, M. (2013). Workplace bullying, mobbing and general harassment: A review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15(3), 280–299. Budhwar, P. S. (2009). Introduction: Human resource management in the Indian context. In P. S. Budhwar & J. Bhatnagar (Eds.), The changing face of people management in India (pp. 3–19). London: Routledge. Ciby, M., & Raya, R. P. (2014). Exploring victims’ experiences of workplace bullying: A grounded theory approach. Vikalpa, 39(2), 69–82. D’Cruz, P. (2007). Interpersonal bullying at work in India: Establishing the presence of the phenomenon. Project report. Ahmedabad: IIM Ahmedabad. D’Cruz, P. (2010). Identity disruptions and identity work: Understanding the impact of workplace bullying on targets. International Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 15(1), 36–52. D’Cruz, P. (2012). Workplace bullying in India. New Delhi: Routledge. D’Cruz, P. (2015a). Depersonalized bullying at work: From evidence to conceptualization. New Delhi: Springer. D’Cruz, P. (2015b). Perceptions of workplace bullying: Views from India. In R.  Cowan, & D. Salin (Eds.), Human resource professionals’ perceptions of workplace bullying from around the globe: Culture matters. Symposium at Academy of Management, 7–12 August 2015, Vancouver, Canada. D’Cruz, P. (2016a). India: A paradoxical context for workplace bullying. In M. Omari & M. Paull (Eds.), Workplace abuse, incivility and bullying: Methodological and cultural perspectives (pp. 55–70). London: Routledge. D’Cruz, P. (2016b). Cyberbullying at work: Experiences of Indian employees. In J.  Webster & K. Randle (Eds.), Dynamics of virtual work (pp. 239–259). London: Palgrave Macmillan. D’Cruz, P. (2017). Partially empowering but not decent? The contradictions of online labour markets. In E.  Noronha & P.  D’Cruz (Eds.), Critical perspectives on work and employment in contemporary India (pp. 173–198). New Delhi: Springer. D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2008a). The exit coping response to workplace bullying: HRM paves the way, 6th International Conference on Workplace Bullying and Harassment, 4–6 June, Montreal, Canada. D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2008b). Employer as oppressor: Engaging the organizational framework in explaining workplace bullying, 6th International Conference on Workplace Bullying and Harassment, 4–6 June, Montreal, Canada. D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2009). Experiencing depersonalized bullying: A study of Indian call centre agents. Work Organization, Labour and Globalization, 3(1), 26–46.

28

P. D’Cruz et al.

D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2010a). The exit coping response to workplace bullying: The contribution of inclusivist and exclusivist HRM strategies. Employee Relations, 32(2), 102–120. D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2010b). Protecting my interests: Target coping with workplace bullying. The Qualitative Report, 15(3), 507–534. D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2011). The limits to workplace friendship: Managerialist HRM and bystander behaviour in the context of workplace bullying. Employee Relations, 33(3), 269–288. D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2012a). Clarifying my world: Identity work in the context of workplace bullying. The Qualitative Report, 17(6), 1–29. D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2012b). High commitment management practices re-examined: The case of Indian call centres. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 33(2), 185–205. D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2013a). Navigating the extended reach: Target experiences of cyberbullying at work. Information and Organization, 23(4), 324–343. D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2013b). Breathers, releases, outlets and pauses: Employee resistance in the context of depersonalized bullying. The Qualitative Report, 18(36), 1–24. D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2014a). The interface between technology and customer cyberbullying: Evidence from India. Information and Organization, 24(3), 176–193. D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2014b). Workplace bullying in the context of organisational change: The significance of pluralism. Industrial Relations Journal, 45(1), 2–21. D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2015a). Ambivalence: Employee response to depersonalized bullying at work. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 36(1), 123–145. D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2015b). Customer cyber bullying: The experiences of India’s international-­facing call centre agents. In S.  Sahadev, K.  Purani, & N.  Malhotra (Eds.), Boundary spanning elements and the marketing function in organizations (pp. 9–32). London: Springer. D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2016). Organizational governance: A promising solution for varieties of workplace bullying. Research on Emotions in Organizations, 12, 409–444. D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2017). Workplace cyberbullying. In K. Briken et al. (Eds.), The new digital workplace: How new technologies revolutionize work (pp. 112–131). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2018a). Target experiences of workplace bullying on online labour markets: Uncovering the nuances of resilience. Employee Relations, 40(1), 139–154. D’Cruz, P., & Noronha, E. (2018b). Abuse on online labour markets: Targets’ coping, power and control. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, 13(1), 53–78. D’Cruz, P., & Rayner, C. (2009). Workplace bullying in India: A multi-city survey. Project report. Ahmedabad: IIM Ahmedabad. D’Cruz, P., & Rayner, C. (2013). Bullying in the Indian workplace: A study of the ITES-BPO sector. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 34(4), 597–619. D’Cruz, P., Noronha, E., & Beale, D. (2014). The workplace bullying-organisational change interface: Emerging challenges for human resource management. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(10), 1434–1459. D’Cruz, P., Paull, M., Omari, M., & Guneri-Cangarli, B. (2016). Target experiences of workplace bullying: Insights from Australia, India and Turkey. Employee Relations, 38(5), 805–823. D’Cruz, P., Noronha, E., & Lutgen-Sandvik, P. (2018). Power, subjectivity and context in workplace bullying, emotional abuse and harassment: Insights from postpositivism. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, 13(1), 2–9. Drèze, J., & Sen, A. (2013). An uncertain glory: India and its contradictions. New Delhi: Penguin. Einarsen, S., & Hoel, H. (2001). The negative acts questionnaire: Development, validation and revision of a measure of bullying at work, 10th European Congress on Work and Organisational Psychology, 16–19 May, Prague, Czech Republic. Einarsen, S., Hoel, H., Zapf, D., & Cooper, C. L. (2011). The concept of bullying and harassment at work: The European tradition. In S.  Einarsen, H.  Hoel, D.  Zapf, & C.  L. Cooper (Eds.), Bullying and harassment in the workplace (pp. 3–40). London: Taylor & Francis.

1  ‘Varieties of Workplace Bullying’ in India: Towards a Contextualized Understanding

29

Farley, S., Coyne, I., Sprigg, C., Axtell, C., & Subramanian, G. (2015). Exploring the impact of workplace cyberbullying on trainee doctors. Medical Education, 49(4), 436–443. Fox, S., & Spector, P. (2005). Counterproductive workplace behaviour: An integration of both actor and recipient perspectives on causes and consequences. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association/APA. Gannon, M. J., & Pillai, R. (2013). Understanding global cultures: Metaphorical journeys through 31 nations, clusters of nations, continents and diversity. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Gardner, D., et al. (2016). Predictors of workplace bullying and cyberbullying in New Zealand. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 13(5), 448. Gupta, R., Bakhshi, A., & Einarsen, S. (2017). Investigating workplace bullying in India: Psychometric properties, validity, and cutoff scores of negative acts questionnaire–revised. SAGE Open, 7(2), 1–12. Harriss-White, B. (2017). Matters in motion: Work and livelihoods in India’s economy of waste. In E. Noronha & P. D’Cruz (Eds.), Critical perspectives on work and employment in globalizing India (pp. 95–112). New Delhi: Springer. Hogh, A., Mikkelsen, E. G., & Hansen, A. M. (2011a). Individual consequences of workplace bullying/mobbing. In S. Einarsen, H. Hoel, D. Zapf, & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Bullying and harassment in the workplace (pp. 107–128). London: Taylor and Francis. Hogh, A., Carneiro, I. G., Giver, H., & Rugulies, R. (2011b). Are immigrants in the nursing industry at increased risk of bullying at work? A one-year follow-up study. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 52(1), 49–56. India Labour and Employment Report [ILER]. (2014). Workers in the era of globalization. New Delhi: Institute for Human Development and Academic Foundation. Ito, T. (2009). Caste discrimination and transaction costs in the labour market: Evidence from rural North India. Journal of Developmental Economics, 88(2), 292–300. Jodhka, S. S., & Newman, K. (2007). In the name of globalisation: Meritocracy, productivity and the hidden language of caste. Economic and Political Weekly, 42(41), 4125–4132. Kakar, S., et  al. (2002). Leadership in Indian organisations from a comparative perspective. International Journal of Cross-Cultural Management, 2(2), 239–250. Kar, S., & Sakthivel, S. (2007). Reforms and regional inequality in India. Economic and Political Weekly, 42(47), 69–77. Karatuna, I. (2015). Targets’ coping with workplace bullying: A qualitative study. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, 10(1), 21–37. Keashly, L., & Harvey, S. (2006). Emotional abuse at work. In E.  K. Kelloway, J.  Barling, & J. Furrell (Eds.), Handbook of workplace violence (pp. 95–120). Thousand Oaks: Sage. Korczynski, M. (2002). Human resource management in service work. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Korczynski, M., & Bishop, V. (2008). Abuse, violence and fear on the front line: Implications of the rise of the enchanting myth of customer sovereignty. In S. Fineman (Ed.), The emotional organisation: Passions and power (pp. 74–87). Oxford: Blackwell. Korczynski, M., & Evans, C. (2013). Customer abuse to service workers: An analysis of its social creation within the service economy. Work, Employment and Society, 27(5), 768–784. Krishnan, J. (2003). The rights of the new untouchables: A constitutional analysis of HIV jurisprudence in India. Human Rights Quarterly, 25(3), 791–819. LaVan, H., & Martin, W.  M. (2008). Bullying in the US workplace: Normative and process-­ oriented ethical approaches. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(2), 147–165. Law, R., Dollard, M. F., Tuckey, M. R., & Dormann, C. (2011). Psychosocial safety climate as a lead indicator of workplace bullying and harassment, job resources, psychological health and employee engagement. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 43(5), 1782–1793. Leymann, H. (1996). The content and development of mobbing at work. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5(2), 165–184. Liefooghe, A. P., & MacKenzie-Davey, K. (2001). Accounts of workplace bullying: The role of the organization. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 10(4), 375–392.

30

P. D’Cruz et al.

Lutgen-Sandvik, P. (2005). Water smoothing stones: Subordinate resistance to workplace bullying (Unpublished Ph.D. thesis). University of Arizona, Tempe, USA. Lutgen-Sandvik, P. (2006). Take this job and: Quitting and other forms of resistance to workplace bullying. Communication Monographs, 73(4), 406–433. Lutgen-Sandvik, P., & Scheller Arsht, S. (2014). How unaddressed bullying affects employees, workgroups, workforces, and organizations: The widespread aversive effects of toxic communication climates. In J. Lipinski & L. M. Crothers (Eds.), Bullying in the workplace: Causes, symptoms, and remedies (pp. 51–65). New York: Routledge. Madheswaran, S., & Attewell, P. (2007). Caste discrimination in the Indian urban labour market: Evidence from the National Sample Survey. Economic and Political Weekly, 42(41), 4146–4153. Mazumdar, I. (2007). Women workers and globalization: Emergent contradictions in India. Kolkata: Stree. Mehta, B. S., & Shree, M. (2017). Inequality, gender and socio-religious groups. Economic and Political Weekly, 52(8), 56–60. Mirchandani, K. (2012). Phone clones: Authentic work in the transnational service economy. Ithaca: ILR Press, Cornell University. Moore, W. E. (1966). Industrialisation and social change. In B. F. Hoselitz & W. E. Moore (Eds.), Industrialisation and society (pp. 299–370). Paris: UNESCO-Mouton. Mukherjee, M. (2004). Women and work in the shadow of globalization. Indian Journal of Gender Studies, 11(3), 275–290. Natasha, S. K., & Parasuraman, S. (2017). Gender injustice across spheres. Economic and Political Weekly, 52(27), 68–76. Niedl, K. (1996). Mobbing and well-being: Economic and personnel development implications. European Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology, 5(2), 239–249. Nielsen, M. B., Matthiesen, S. B., & Einarsen, S. (2010). The impact of methodological moderators on prevalence rates of workplace bullying: A meta-analysis. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83(4), 955–979. Noronha, E. (2003). Indian trade unions: Today and beyond tomorrow. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 39(1), 95–107. Noronha, E. (2005). Ethnicity in industrial organisations. New Delhi: Rawat. Noronha, E., & D’Cruz, P. (2009a). Employee identity in Indian call centres: The notion of professionalism. New Delhi: Sage. Noronha, E., & D’Cruz, P. (2009b). Organising call centre agents in India. Industrial Relations Journal, 40(3), 215–234. Noronha, E., & D’Cruz, P. (2013). Hope to despair: The experience of organising Indian call centre employees. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 48(3), 471–486. Noronha, E., & D’Cruz, P. (2017). The world of work in contemporary India: The relevance of a critical lens. In E. Noronha & P. D’Cruz (Eds.), Critical perspectives on work and employment in contemporary India (pp. 1–14). New Delhi: Springer. Noronha, E., & D’Cruz, P. (2018). Local struggles confront decentralisation: Organising brick kiln workers in Gujarat, India, 19th International Sociological Association Conference, 15–21 July, Toronto, Canada. Noronha, E., & Magala, S. (2017). Going Dutch, remaining Indian: The work experiences of IT expatriates. In E. Noronha & P. D’Cruz (Eds.), Critical perspectives on work and employment in globalizing India (pp. 283–303). New Delhi: Springer. Noronha, E., & Sharma, R. N. (2003). Indian industry and ethnicity: A study of two organizations in Mumbai. Global Business Review, 3(1), 153–170. Noronha, E., Chakraborty, S., & D’Cruz, P. (2018). Doing dignity work: Indian security guards’ interface with precariousness. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10551-018-3996-x. Pandey, J.  (1981). A note about social power through ingratiation among workers. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 54(1), 65–67.

1  ‘Varieties of Workplace Bullying’ in India: Towards a Contextualized Understanding

31

Pandey, J., & Singh, R. P. (1986). Attribution and evaluation of manipulative social behaviour. The Journal of Psychology, 126(6), 735–744. Pandey, J., & Singh, P. (1987). Effects of Machiavellianism, other- enhancement, and power- position on affect, power feeling, and evaluation of the ingratiator. The Journal of Psychology, 121(3), 287–300. Papola, T. S., & Sharma, A. N. (1999). Gender and employment in India. New Delhi: Vikas. Punwani, J.  (1997). Sexual harassment: Is it enough to set guidelines? Economic and Political Weekly, 32(42), 2645–2646. Rai, A., & Agarwal, U.  A. (2017a). Workplace bullying among Indian managers: Prevalence, sources and bystanders’ reactions. International Journal of Indian Culture and Business Management, 15(1), 58–81. Rai, A., & Agarwal, U.  A. (2017b). Linking workplace bullying and work engagement: The mediating role of psychological contract violation. South Asian Journal of Human Resources Management, 4(1), 42–71. Rai, A., & Agarwal, U. A. (2018). Workplace bullying and employee silence: A moderated mediation model of psychological contract violation and workplace friendship. Personnel Review, 47(1), 226–256. Ralston, D. A., et al. (1993). Differences in managerial values: A study of US, Hong Kong and PRC managers. Journal of International Business Studies, 24(2), 249–275. Ramsay, S., Troth, A.  C., & Branch, S. (2011). Workplace bullying through the lens of social psychology: A group level analysis. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 84(4), 799–816. Rao, S. (2017). Caste discrimination and agricultural performance in India. Economic and Political Weekly, 52(25–26), 32–38. Rege, S. (2003). Sociology of gender: The challenge of feminist sociological knowledge. New Delhi: Sage. Saini, D. S. (2009). Labour law in India: Structure and working. In P. S. Budhwar & J. Bhatnagar (Eds.), The changing face of people management in India. London: Routledge. Samnani, A.  K., & Singh, P. (2012). 20 years of workplace bullying research: A review of the antecedents and consequences of bullying in the workplace. Aggression and Violent Behaviour, 17(6), 581–589. Sanga, P., & Shaban, A. (2017). Regional divergence and inequalities in India. Economic and Political Weekly, 52(1), 102–110. Sinha, J. B. P. (1982). The nurturant task leader. New Delhi: Concept. Sinha, J.  B. P. (1985). Psychic relevance of work in Indian culture. Dynamic Psychiatry, 18, 134–141. Sinha, J. B. P. (1994a). Power dynamics in Indian organizations. In R. N. Kanungo & M. Mendonca (Eds.), Work motivation (pp. 213–229). New Delhi: Sage. Sinha, J. B. P. (1994b). Cultural embeddedness and developmental role of industrial organizations in India. In H. C. Triandis, M. D. Dunnette, & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial organizational psychology (pp. 727–764). Palo Alto: Consulting Psychology Press. Sinha, J. B. P. (1997). A cultural perspective on organisational behaviour in India. In C. P. Earley & M.  Erez (Eds.), New perspectives on international industrial/organisational psychology (pp. 53–74). San Francisco: Lexington Press. Sinha, J. B. P. (2002). A cultural frame for understanding organizational behaviour. Psychology and Developing Societies, 14(1), 155–166. Sinha, J. B. P. (2008). Culture and organisational behaviour. New Delhi: Sage. Sinha, J. B. P. (2015). Psychosocial analysis of the Indian mindset. New Delhi: Springer. Sinha, J.  B. P., & Kanungo, R.  N. (1997). Context sensitivity and balancing in organizational behaviour. International Journal of Psychology, 32(2), 93–105. Solomon, J. (2007). Corporate governance and accountability. Chichester: Wiley. Steers, R.  M., Nardon, L., & Sanchez-Runder, C.  J. (2013). Management across cultures: Developing global competencies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

32

P. D’Cruz et al.

Tejani, S. (2004). Sexual harassment at the workplace: Emerging problems and debates. Economic and Political Weekly, 39(41), 4491–4494. Thirlwall, A. (2015). Organizational sequestering of workplace bullying: Adding insult to injury. Journal of Management and Organization, 21(2), 145–158. Thorat, S., & Attewell, P. (2007). The legacy of social exclusion: A correspondence study of job discrimination in India. Economic and Political Weekly, 42(41), 4141–4145. Tricker, B. (2009). Corporate governance: Principles, policies and practices. New York: Oxford University Press. Tripathi, R. C. (1990). Interplay of values in the functioning of Indian organizations. International Journal of Psychology, 25(3–6), 715–734. van Heugten, K. (2011). Theorizing active bystanders as change agents in workplace bullying of social workers. Families in Society, 92(2), 219–224. Venkataratnam, C.  S. (2009). Employment relations in India. In P.  S. Budhwar & J.  Bhatnagar (Eds.), The changing face of people management in India (pp. 23–59). London: Routledge. Verma, J. (2004). Social values. In J. Pandey (Ed.), Psychology in India revisited (pp. 60–117). New Delhi: Sage. World Bank. (2017, October 4). Female labour force. Retrieved from https://data.worldbank.org/ indicator/SL.TLF.TOTL.FE.ZS?locations=IN&name_desc=false&view=chart. Accessed 14 Jan 2018. Yagil, D. (2008). When the customer is wrong: A review of research on aggression and sexual harassment in service encounters. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 13(2), 141–152. Zapf, D., Knorz, C., & Kulla, M. (1996). On the relationship between mobbing factors, and job content, social work environment, and health outcomes. European Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology, 5(2), 215–237.

Chapter 2

Workplace Bullying and Physical Ill-Health: Role of Negative Emotions and Perceived Organizational Support Mariam Ciby and R. P. Raya

Abstract  Workplace bullying is a phenomenon involving frequent and prolonged exposure to negative behaviours at work. Researchers have identified the negative influence of workplace bullying on the physical health of employees. The study reported in this chapter examines the underlying mechanism in the relationship between workplace bullying and physical ill-health, testing the mediating role of negative emotions. The study explores the role of perceived organizational support (POS) in moderating the direct relationship between workplace bullying and physical ill-health in the presence of negative emotions as the mediator. The data were collected from 425 information technology professionals in India. The results from partial least squares (PLS) structural equation modelling (SEM) and PROCESS tool show that negative emotions partially mediated the relationship between workplace bullying and physical ill-health. The study results provide evidence of the moderation effect of POS in the direct relationship between workplace bullying and physical ill-health in the presence of the mediator. However, the significant positive moderation effect of POS draws attention to the fact that even with high levels of POS, the influence of workplace bullying on physical ill-health was not controlled. Future studies can explore the role of personality characteristics of the victims and POS in moderating the relationship between workplace bullying and physical ill-health. Keywords  Workplace bullying · Physical health · Negative emotions · Perceived organizational support · Moderation · Mediation · Information technology professionals · India

M. Ciby (*) Department of Management, Saintgits Institute of Management, Kottayam, India R. P. Raya Department of Management Studies, Pondicherry University, Puducherry, India © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018 P. D’Cruz et al. (eds.), Indian Perspectives on Workplace Bullying, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1017-1_2

33

34

M. Ciby and R. P. Raya

2.1  Introduction Workplace bullying is a devastating problem for employees compared to all other kinds of work-related stress put together (Einarsen et al. 2003). Workplace bullying refers to all situations where one or more employees are exposed to repeated negative behaviours over a period; it does not refer to a single incident in the workplace (Einarsen and Skogstad 1996). The negative behaviours include verbal or non-­ verbal abuse, harassing, offending, socially excluding or negatively affecting someone’s work tasks (Einarsen et al. 2003; Hoel and Cooper 2000). The repetition and duration of the exposure to negative behaviours are the most important distinguishing features of bullying. Over the past four decades, workplace bullying has surfaced as a much-researched topic that gained scholarly interest and legal attention from various parts of the world. The phenomenon gained academic attention in the late 1980s with the pioneering efforts of Heinz Leymann in Sweden (Leymann 1990). Research expanded from the Nordic countries to the UK (United Kingdom) through the works of Andrea Adams who coined the term ‘workplace bullying’. By the mid-1990s, research on workplace bullying gradually expanded to Australia and other European countries (Einarsen et al. 2003). By 2000, research extended to Denmark, the United States of America, South Africa, New Zealand and Asia. In India, research on workplace bullying is still scarce and is in its infancy; D’Cruz (2010, 2012, 2015, 2016) has done pioneering efforts to study the concept in India. The various alternate terminologies of workplace bullying are mobbing, work harassment, emotional abuse, lateral or horizontal violence and psychological harassment (Ciby and Raya 2015; Keashly 1997; Leymann 1990; Sá and Fleming 2008). Workplace bullying has global prevalence; at a worldwide average, at least one out of ten employees are exposed to workplace bullying (Nielsen et al. 2010). The prevalence of workplace bullying might vary globally due to the influence of national culture (Einarsen 2000). Countries with low-power distance culture seem to have lower prevalence rates (e.g. Scandinavia), and countries with high-power distance culture (e.g. India, the USA, Pakistan and Africa) seem to have a higher prevalence of bullying (Ciby and Raya 2015; Einarsen 2000). India is a country with high-power distance, and researchers have reported a higher rate of prevalence of bullying. D’Cruz and Rayner (2013) reported that 42.3% of information technology enabled services-business process outsourcing (ITES-BPO) sector employees in India were exposed to workplace bullying frequently. Ciby (2016) explained that 41.4% of the information technology (IT) professionals in India were bullied at least weekly over a period of 6 months. Marcello (2010) found that IT professionals in the USA were frequently exposed to negative behaviours at work. IT professionals are knowledge workers with high levels of education and intelligence. IT professionals experience high stress due to their nature of work, high job demands, heavy workloads, tight deadlines and extended work hours (Ahuja et  al. 2007; Moore 2000; Padma et al. 2015). Padma et al.’s (2015) study among IT professionals in

2  Workplace Bullying and Physical Ill-Health: Role of Negative Emotions…

35

India reported that employees with high levels of stress had symptoms of physical ill-health such as diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidaemia and insomnia. The  stressful work environment contributes  to the higher incidence of workplace  bullying (Agervold 2009; Hauge et  al. 2007; van den Broeck et  al. 2011). Various  studies have illustrated the negative influence of workplace bullying on work outcomes such as turnover intention, job satisfaction, organizational commitment and sickness absenteeism (Djurkovic et al. 2008; Glasø and Notelaers 2012; Hoel and Cooper 2000; Laschinger et al. 2012; Sá and Fleming 2008). Researchers have supported the notion that workplace bullying has negative impact on physical health (Bonde et al. 2016; Cooper et al. 2004; Hoel and Cooper 2000; Niedhammer et al. 2009; Sá and Fleming 2008; Tuckey et al. 2010; Vartia 2001). D’Cruz (2010) and D’Cruz and Noronha’s (2010) qualitative study in India among ITES-BPO employees showed that victims experienced severe emotional strain of anxiety, depression and meaninglessness due to unresolved situations of bullying, which in turn resulted in physical ill-health symptoms such as gastrointestinal problems, influenza and sleep disruptions. On the same lines, D’Cruz and Noronha’s (2013) qualitative study of cyberbullying experiences of IT and ITES-­ BPO employees evidenced the physical and emotional distress of victims. Fear, anxiety, anger, depression, humiliation, emotional exhaustion, headaches, sleep problems and insomnia, blood pressure problems, gastrointestinal problems and body fatigue were described (D’Cruz and Noronha 2013). Ciby and Raya’s (2014) qualitative study among IT professionals in India reported that victims of bullying experienced various negative emotions such as anger, sadness, frustration and mood changes. The victims also suffered from depression, anxiety, sleep disturbances, headaches and physical health deterioration (Ciby and Raya 2014). The bullied victim’s experience of negative emotions and physical ill-health symptoms could be explained in light of the psychosomatic hypothesis. The psychosomatic hypothesis states that individuals exposed to stressful situations experience negative affectivity and are thereby prone to higher rates of physical illness (Watson and Pennebaker 1989). Negative affectivity refers to negative emotions such as anger, anxiety, distress, guilt or nervousness (Watson et al. 1988). There is evidence that negative emotions are a potential mediator in the relationship between exposure to bullying and employee’s attitudinal and behavioural outcomes such as job satisfaction and turnover intention (Ciby 2016; Glasø and Notelaers 2012; Glasø et al. 2011). The psychosomatic model of workplace bullying emphasizes that workplace bullying influences negative affectivity which, in turn, influences physical health (Casimir et  al. 2012; Hansen et  al. 2006; Mikkelsen and Einarsen 2002). The current study aims to examine the role of negative emotions in mediating the relationship between bullying and physical ill-health among IT professionals in India. Baillien et al. (2011) identified that job demands, heavy workload and low control are antecedents of bullying at workplaces. The Job Demands-Control-Support (JDC-S) model explains that high job demands, low work control and low social support would affect the physical health of employees (Johnson and Hall 1988). Leather et al. (1998) reported that perceived support from within the organization

36

M. Ciby and R. P. Raya

moderated the relationship between work-related violence and negative influence on employee well-being and health. Niedhammer et al. (2009) have highlighted the role of social support in controlling the effects of bullying on sleep disturbances. Parzefall and Salin (2010) have conceptualized the role of perceived organizational support (POS) in buffering the effects of workplace bullying such as physical health symptoms. Ciby and Raya’s (2014) qualitative study among IT professionals in India has explained the role of perceived organizational support in managing workplace bullying and its effects. Researchers have empirically analysed the role of POS in moderating the relationship between workplace bullying and turnover intention (Ciby 2016; Djurkovic et al. 2008; van Schalkwyk et al. 2011). The present study aims to explore and confirm the role of perceived organizational support in moderating the relationship between workplace bullying and physical ill-health in the presence of the negative emotions as the mediator among IT professionals in India.

2.2  Theoretical Background and Research Hypotheses 2.2.1  T  he Relationship Between Workplace Bullying and Physical Ill-Health Workplace bullying refers to all situations in which employees feel subjected to negative behaviours at least weekly over a period of 6 months. Physical health is a state of physical well-being, whereas physical ill-health shows symptoms of poor health conditions. Many studies have reported the influence of workplace bullying on mental health symptoms such as depression, anxiety, mental stress, mental fatigue/burnout, posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms and psychological and psychosomatic health complaints (Agervold and Mikkelsen 2004; Bonde et  al. 2016; Cooper et al. 2004; Hansen et al. 2006; Hoel and Cooper 2000; Mikkelsen and Einarsen 2002; Sá and Fleming 2008; Tehrani 2004; Vartia 2001). However, only few studies have analysed the effect of workplace bullying on physical health symptoms. Hoel and Cooper’s (2000) study in Great Britain found that workplace bullying has a significant effect on the physical health of victims. Vartia’s (2001) study in Finland reported that targets of workplace bullying consumed sleep-inducing drugs and sedatives more often as compared to non-bullied employees. Cooper et al.’s (2004) study in Great Britain reported that workplace bullying influences the physical health of victims. Sà and Fleming (2008) reported insomnia and somatic symptoms among bullied Portuguese nurses. Another study in France revealed the presence of sleep disturbances among victims of bullying (Niedhammer et  al. 2009). A longitudinal study among the police officers in Australia explored the effect of bullying on cardiovascular health problems (Tuckey et  al. 2010). D’Cruz (2010) and D’Cruz and Noronha’s (2010, 2013) qualitative studies in India among ITES-BPO and IT employees showed that victims

2  Workplace Bullying and Physical Ill-Health: Role of Negative Emotions…

37

e­xperienced various physical ailments such as headaches, sleep disruptions and insomnia, influenza, blood pressure problems, gastrointestinal problems and body fatigue. Ciby and Raya’s (2014) qualitative study among IT professionals in India reported that victims suffered from depression, anxiety, sleep disturbances, headaches and physical health deterioration. Bonde et al.’s (2016) longitudinal study in Denmark reported the association of bullying with poor self-rated health. The above studies suggest that bullying has an effect on symptoms of physical ill-health. Hence, we propose that workplace bullying affects the physical health of IT professionals in India. H1: Workplace bullying has a significant effect on physical ill-health.

2.2.2  T  he Mediating Role of Negative Emotions in the Relationship Between Workplace Bullying and Physical Ill-Health The psychosomatic hypothesis suggests that stressful situations are likely to develop negative affectivity and individuals are prone to higher rates of physical illness (Watson and Pennebaker 1989). There is evidence that workplace bullying increases negative emotions or negative affectivity of employees (Brotheridge and Lee 2010; Sá and Fleming 2008; Tracy et al. 2006; Vie et al. 2012). Ciby and Raya’s (2014) study among IT employees in India found that victims of bullying experienced various negative emotions such as anger, sadness, frustration and mood changes. The victims also reported sleep disturbances, headaches and physical health deterioration (Ciby and Raya 2014). D’Cruz (2010) and D’Cruz and Noronha’s (2010) study of ITES-BPO employees in India showed that victims’ physical ill-health arose from severe emotional strain which was linked to unresolved situations of workplace bullying. Researchers have gained support from the psychosomatic model of workplace bullying in explaining the mechanisms that underlie the relationship between workplace bullying and physical ill-health. Mikkelsen and Einarsen (2002) reported that negative affectivity acted as a partial mediator in the relationship between workplace bullying and psychological and psychosomatic health complaints. Hansen et al. (2006) supported that negative affectivity partially mediated the relationship between bullying exposure and mental health symptoms. Negative affectivity or negative emotion seems to be an important factor in understanding the detrimental effect of workplace bullying on the mental health of victims. Very few studies have reported the mediation effect of negative emotions in the relationship between workplace bullying and physical ill-health or physical health symptoms. Vie et al. (2012) explored the mediating role of emotions in the relationship between bullying and health in the form of musculoskeletal complaints. This study suggested that negative emotions acted as the mediator between bullying and musculoskeletal complaints  (Vie et  al. 2012). Casimir et  al. (2012) could find

38

M. Ciby and R. P. Raya

s­upport for the psychosomatic model among teachers in Australia and Uganda. Negative affect fully mediated the relationship between bullying and physical symptoms among Australian teachers, whereas this was partially mediated in the case of the Ugandan sample (Casimir et al. 2012). The above studies suggest that negative emotions mediate the effect of workplace bullying on health symptoms. Therefore, we hypothesize that workplace bullying has an effect on negative emotions which, in turn, influences physical ill-health among IT professionals in India. H2: Negative emotions mediate the relationship between workplace bullying and physical ill-health.

2.2.3  T  he Moderating Role of Perceived Organizational Support (POS) in the Relationship Between Workplace Bullying and Physical Ill-Health A stressful work environment, job demands and heavy workloads are described as antecedents of bullying (Agervold 2009; Baillien et al. 2011; Hauge et al. 2007; van den Broeck et al. 2011). The Job Demands-Control-Support (JDC-S) model is an extension of the Job Demands-Control model, which explains that high job demands, low control and low support will affect the psychological and physiological well-­ being of employees (Johnson and Hall 1988). JDC-S model explains how a stressful work environment affects employee health and how support from the organization can reduce the negative effects of bullying. Social support has a major role to play in buffering the negative effects of bullying. Limited studies have empirically explored the influence of moderators in the relationship between workplace bullying and physical ill-health. Perceived organizational support (POS) is illustrated as a moderator in the relationship between workplace bullying and turnover intention (Ciby 2016; Djurkovic et al. 2008; van Schalkwyk et al. 2011). According to Leather et al. (1998), the perceived support from within the organization moderated the relationship between work-related violence and negative effects on employee well-being and health. POS reduced psychological strain in stressful work situations and had a positive influence on employee well-being and health. Niedhammer et al. (2009) reported that men with past exposure to bullying reported a lower prevalence of sleep disturbances with high levels of social support. On the contrary, bullied women reported to have higher sleep disturbances even at high levels of social support. The study highlighted the importance of social support in controlling the effects of bullying (Niedhammer et al. 2009). Parzefall and Salin (2010) conceptualized the role of POS in buffering the effects of workplace bullying such as physical health symptoms, emphasizing the importance of POS as a coping mechanism in organizations. POS is the employee’s belief that the organization values their contributions, cares about their well-being and supports them in all situations (Eisenberger et al. 1986). When employees feel that the organization is supportive in meeting their needs, they will be committed to the organization in

2  Workplace Bullying and Physical Ill-Health: Role of Negative Emotions…

39

achieving its goals. Ciby and Raya’s (2014) qualitative study among IT professionals in India observed that POS has a significant role in managing workplace bullying and its effects. Rai and Agarwal’s (2017b) qualitative study among Indian employees suggested that victims of bullying felt a lack of support from the management and also experienced physical ill-health symptoms such as headache, loss of appetite and sleeplessness. Therefore, we postulate the following hypothesis: H3: Perceived organizational support moderates the direct relationship between workplace bullying and physical ill-health in the presence of negative emotions as the mediator.

2.3  Research Method 2.3.1  Sampling Design and Data Collection The sample data of this cross-sectional study was collected from information technology (IT) professionals in India using multistage purposive sampling. IT professionals considered for the study were employees who are working in any of the specialized areas of IT excluding the business process management (BPM) sector. Bengaluru and Chennai were selected as the locations for the current study, since they are the two major IT hubs in India with the highest number of IT firms and employee size. From these locations, IT companies listed in the top 20 IT-BPM companies in India for the financial year 2013–2014 were selected for the study (NASSCOM [National Association of Software and Services Companies]/Industry Rankings). Out of the 20 companies in the list, 5 of the pure-play BPM firms were excluded, and the 4 foreign companies mentioned in  the website were included. Hence, the final list had 19 companies both India-based and foreign-based, which were having operations in India. The focal point of these companies were contacted in both the locations and was requested to participate in the research. Because of the sensitiveness of the topic, only 11 companies agreed to participate in the research. Among the 11 companies, 6 were from Bengaluru and 5 were from Chennai. An e-mail describing the aim of the study and the hyperlink to the online survey was sent to the focal point in each organization. Despite the repeated requests to the focal points in the organizations to forward the survey hyperlink to the employees, it was strenuous to make the employees respond due to the sensitive nature of the topic.  On accessing the hyperlink, the participants were directed to the informed consent page of the online survey. This page provided the purpose of the study, confidentiality declaration and the consent for voluntary participation. The present survey excluded participants with less than 6  months current working experience. The study maintains the confidentiality of the respondents and the companies. The sur-

40

M. Ciby and R. P. Raya

vey was conducted during the period of July 2014 to January 2015. We have collected data about few other variables such as turnover intention and affective commitment in this survey. The information regarding those variables is not included, since it is outside the purview of the current study. Out of the 539 responses received, 425 responses were complete and usable. The survey completion rate was estimated to be 79% based on the responses received. 52.7% of the 425 respondents were men, and 47.3% were women. 70.1% of the respondents were in the age group 21–30 years, while 29.8% were in the age group 31–60 years. The marital status of the respondents indicated that 52.5% were married and 47.5% were single. Sixty-seven percent of the respondents were graduates, and 33% of the respondents had master’s degrees. Based on the classification of the origin of the company headquarters, 56.7% of the respondents were from Indian IT companies and 43.3% from foreign-based IT companies. 77.2% of the respondents were in technical-level jobs, and 22.8% were in managerial-level jobs. Total years of experience of 32.2% of the respondents was 0.6–3 years, 48% had 4–8 years, and 19.8% had above 9 years of experience. The current company experience of 61.6% of the respondents was less than 3 years, and 38.4% had more than 4 years of current experience.

2.3.2  Measuring Instruments The variables of the present study, namely, workplace bullying, negative emotions, physical ill-health and perceived organizational support, were measured using a structured questionnaire. The demographic details of the respondents such as gender, age, marital status, educational qualifications, origin of the company, job type, total experience and current company experience were collected. A pilot survey was conducted to ensure the reliability and content validity of the scales. Workplace bullying is defined as a phenomenon in which employees are exposed to negative behaviours frequently or repeatedly (e.g. weekly) at least over a period of 6 months. The 22-item Negative Acts Questionnaire-Revised (NAQ-R; Einarsen et al. 2009) is the most frequently used scale to measure workplace bullying (Ciby and Raya 2015). Researchers have validated the 22-item NAQ-R (Einarsen et al. 2009) in the Indian context (Gupta et al. 2017; Rai and Agarwal 2017a). The present study utilized a 30-item negative acts inventory that was developed for the IT industry in India (see Appendix) (Ciby 2016). Ciby (2016) reported four factors of bullying behaviours such as person-related, work-related, intimidating and career-related bullying. Career-related bullying was a new factor  identified from the study among IT professionals (Ciby 2016). The 30-item inventory included: • Twenty-two items from Negative Acts Questionnaire-Revised (NAQ-R; Einarsen et  al. 2009)  with minor modifications to make it suitable for Indian setting. NAQ-R reports a good validity and high internal consistency (α = 0.90). • Five items adopted from 32-item scale of NAQ-R (Salin 2001). • Two new bullying behaviours identified from Indian IT context (Ciby and Raya 2014).

2  Workplace Bullying and Physical Ill-Health: Role of Negative Emotions…

41

• One item based on the  industry expert opinion: ‘Somebody withholding your career development opportunities’ (Ciby 2016). The respondents were asked to report how often they were exposed to the behaviours listed in the inventory in their workplace in the past 6 months on a 5-point Likert scale (1, never; 2, rarely; 3, monthly once or twice; 4, weekly once; 5, daily). A good internal consistency reliability (α = 0.95) is reported for the 30-item Negative Acts Questionnaire (NAQ) (Ciby 2016). For the purpose of partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-­ SEM) analysis, a workplace bullying score was calculated from the measured 30-item negative acts Indian scale. The workplace bullying score was the cumulative score of the total frequency of negative behaviours, bullying frequency and the duration of negative acts (Lutgen-Sandvik et al. 2007). The total frequency of negative behaviours is the total number of reported negative acts (reported rarely to daily). The bullying frequency is the number of bullied behaviours (reported weekly or daily). The duration of negative acts was 6 months for all the respondents, since the respondents were asked to report the negative behaviours over the past 6 months. The workplace bullying scores range from 6 to 66. Negative emotions are negative mood states, feelings or reactions to work events, which have behavioural implications. The negative emotions experienced over the past 6  months were measured using the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) (Watson et al. 1988). It consists of ten items, namely, scared, nervous, jittery, irritable, hostile, guilty, ashamed, upset, afraid and distressed. The respondents were asked to indicate to what extent they experienced these emotions at the workplace during the past 6 months on a 5-point Likert scale (1, not at all; 2, a little; 3, moderately; 4, quite a bit; 5, extremely). The scale reported a good internal consistency reliability of 0.84, when measured for experiencing emotions for the duration of the past 1 year. Physical health is a state of physical well-being, whereas ill-health shows symptoms of a poor health condition. Physical ill-health was measured using six items of the short version of the Dutch Occupational Stress Indicator (Evers et  al. 2000). Physical ill-health symptoms measured included inability to get sleep, headaches, feeling unaccountably tired, pricking sensations or twinges in parts of your body, feeling as though not wanting to get up in the morning and feeling dizzy or giddy. The scale reported a satisfactory internal reliability of 0.75. The respondents were requested to assess their current state of health with reference to how they have felt over the last 6 months on a 5-point Likert scale (1, never; 2, rarely; 3, sometimes; 4, often; and 5, very often). Perceived organizational support (POS) was operationalized as the perception of the overall support received from the team members, supervisors, higher officials, human resource professionals or the clients. The scale consisted of seven items including six high loading items from the Survey of Perceived Organizational Support (Eisenberger et al. 1986) and one item developed for the study (‘The organization would help in tackling situations of bullying’). The variable was measured on a 5-point Likert scale, with the response categories of 1, strongly disagree; 2,

42

M. Ciby and R. P. Raya

disagree; 3, neither agree nor disagree; 4, agree; and 5, strongly agree. The internal reliability reported for the 6-item scale was good (α = 0.92).

2.3.3  Data Analysis Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), SmartPLS and PROCESS macro were used for data analysis. Partial least squares (SmartPLS; Ringle et al. 2015) was used for structural equation modelling due to five main reasons (Hair Jr et al. 2013; Roldán and Sánchez-Franco 2012). First, it is suitable for testing models with complexity (mediation and moderation hypotheses), and second, it can process single-­ item and multi-item constructs, with no identification problem. Third, it is suited to the incremental nature of the study, which means that former models form the basis of the study, while the present model adds new measures and new structural paths. Fourth, the latent variable scores are used for the subsequent analysis. Fifth, PLS did not require assumptions of multivariate normality. PLS model is analysed and interpreted in two phases. First, the measurement model defines the latent variables and assigns indicators to each. It attempts to analyse the reliability and validity of the constructs. Second, the structural model estimates multicollinearity, structural path coefficients, predictive accuracy, predictive relevance and effect size of the causal models. PROCESS macro was specifically used to analyse the significance of the indirect effect of the relationships in the study. The input to the macro was latent variable scores from PLS analysis (Hayes 2013). The latent variable scores are mean-centred and bootstrapped for 5000 samples in the macro. Bootstrapping is an increasingly accepted method of resampling for testing the indirect effect, where there are no assumptions of the sampling distribution (Bollen and Stine 1990; Shrout and Bolger 2002). Bootstrapping repeatedly resamples the original data set (recommended 5000 times) and computes a sampling distribution of the indirect effect.

2.4  Results and Findings The descriptive statistics of the latent constructs of the present study – workplace bullying, negative emotions, physical ill-health and perceived organizational support – are presented (Table 2.1). Common method variance (CMV) was assessed using Harman single-factor test (Podsakoff et  al. 2003). The research variables were subjected to an exploratory factor analysis using the unrotated factor solution. Five factors emerged with eigenvalues greater than one, and the factors accounted for a total variance of 68.33%. The largest factor accounted for a variance of 35.39%. This explains that items did not load on to a single factor and one factor did not account for the majority of covariance among the variables. Hence common method bias was not a major problem in the study.

2  Workplace Bullying and Physical Ill-Health: Role of Negative Emotions… Table 2.1 Descriptive statistics of constructs

43

Construct/variables Mean SD Workplace bullying scorea 21.6 10.38 Negative emotions 2.09 0.78 Physical ill-health 2.5 0.90 Perceived organizational support 3.17 0.85 Source: Primary data SD standard deviation a Workplace bullying is a single-item score ranging from 6 to 66

2.4.1  Measurement Model The requirements of individual indicator reliability for all the latent constructs were satisfactory, since the outer loadings were greater than 0.707 (Carmines and Zeller 1979). This result was achieved by removing four weak items of the negative emotions construct (loadings